OZONERULES_REPORTTOBOARDOFSUPERVISORS2016-09-06.PDF

Return to list of Attachments
Executive Summary
of the Report to the Board of Supervisors
Prepared by the Maricopa County Air Quality Department
Board Hearing Date: November 2, 2016
Case #/Title: AQ-2015-002-Rule 322 (Power Plant Operations)
Agenda Item:
Supervisor Districts: All Districts
The Maricopa County Air Quality Department (department) complied with all statutory and county policies
throughout this rulemaking process. Per the Enhanced Regulatory Outreach Program (EROP) Policy: “In addition
to the required staff report, an executive summary of the report including an overview of stakeholder input and
staff responses will be provided to the Board of Supervisors at least one week prior to any Board of Supervisors’
public hearing.”
Overview Of The Report To The Board Of Supervisors:
The department is requesting the Board of Supervisors to approve amendments to Maricopa County Air Pollution
Control Regulations regarding Rule 322 (Power Plant Operations) and approve submitting the amended rule as a
revision to the (Arizona) State Implementation Plan (SIP).
The purpose of this rulemaking is to address the requirements of the SIP for “moderate” nonattainment for the
2008 eight-hour ozone national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS). The proposed amendments in Rule 322
include Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT) for nitrogen oxides (NOx).
Overview Of Stakeholder Input And Staff Responses:
Three Stakeholder Workshops were held: June 29, 2015, September 3, 2015, and February 24, 2016. Stakeholders
expressed a general understanding for the need for rule revisions based on the department’s nonattainment status;
however, Stakeholders were concerned about the emission limitations and what is considered “RACT” and what
is considered “beyond RACT”. Stakeholders requested comparisons to comparable agencies to see how they have
managed to achieve RACT. In addition, questions were raised regarding the following:
● The stringency of Rule 322 compared to the stringency in the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality’s
(ADEQ’s) rules
● Cost effectiveness and its relationship to RACT and the impact on sources
● Most Achievable Control Technology (MACT) standards and the application to the boiler standards
● The compliance schedule and the timing of when sources must show compliance with the proposed emission
limitations
● The phrase “owner and/or operator” and the implications of responsibility and liability
● Exemptions for equipment operating hours and during startup and shutdown
● The requirements for continuous emission monitoring systems and allowances for alternative methods

A 30-day comment period was held May-June 2016. During the 30-day comment period, the department received
written comments from the Arizona Public Service Company (APS), Salt River Project Agricultural Improvement
and Power District (SRP), and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Stakeholders’ concerns were
mainly clarifying in nature; their main concern was that the rule properly reflect RACT for NOx. Their comments
addressed applicability, exemptions, definitions, emissions requirements for NOx and opacity, requirements for
emissions control systems (ECS), administrative requirements, and recordkeeping requirements. In particular, the
EPA commented that Rule 322 must apply to all power plants and not just to power plants built or modified after
May 10, 1996.
The department discussed the comments with Stakeholders and reached an equitable consensus regarding how the
comments should be addressed. The department addressed all of the comments; responses have been incorporated
into the draft rule and are explained in the Preamble of the Draft Notice of Final Rulemaking.

Return to list of attachments
Report to the Board of Supervisors
Prepared by the Maricopa County Air Quality Department
Board of Health Meeting Date: April 25, 2016
Board Hearing Date: November 2, 2016
Case #/Title: AQ-2015-002-Rule 322 (Power Plant Operations)
Agenda Item:
Supervisor Districts: All Districts
Applicant: Staff
Request: Approve amendments to Maricopa County Air Pollution Control
Regulations regarding Rule 322 (Power Plant Operations) and approve
submitting the amended rule as a revision to the (Arizona) State
Implementation Plan (SIP).
The purpose of this rulemaking is to revise the rule to address the
requirements of the SIP for “moderate” nonattainment for the 2008 eight-
hour ozone national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS). The
proposed amendments in Rule 322 include Reasonably Available Control
Technology (RACT) for nitrogen oxides (NOx).
Support/Opposition: During the 30-day comment period, the department received written
comments from the Arizona Public Service Company (APS), Salt River
Project Agricultural Improvement and Power District (SRP), and the
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA); they stated their opinion
as “support” or “other”. Stakeholders’ concerns were mainly clarifying in
nature; their main concern was that the rule properly reflect RACT for
NOx. Their comments addressed applicability, exemptions, definitions,
emissions requirements for NOx and opacity, requirements for emissions
control systems (ECS), administrative requirements, and recordkeeping
requirements.
Staff
Recommendation: Approve
Board of Health
Recommendation: Approve per Staff recommended language
Additional
Comments: This regulatory change is following the Enhanced Regulatory Outreach
Program (EROP) Policy and workflow process. The County Manager
briefed the Board of Supervisors regarding this rulemaking in May 2015.
Stakeholder workshops were held June 2015 through February 2016. On
April 25, 2016, the Board of Health approved this regulatory change for
the Expedited Process.
Presented By: Philip A. McNeely, R.G., Director
Prepared By: Hether Krause

Attachments: Summary of the proposed regulatory change (See Item 6 of the Draft
Notice of Final Rulemaking)
Analysis of input received during the process and how that input was
responded to (See Item 13 of the Draft Notice of Final Rulemaking)
Language of proposed regulatory change or amendment (See Item 17 of
the Draft Notice of Final Rulemaking)
Preamble required by Arizona Revised Statutes (A.R.S.) § 49-471.05
(See Draft Notice of Final Rulemaking)
Minutes from Board of Health meeting
Copies of all written and electronic Stakeholder input
Signed copy of the Maricopa County Resolution “Moratorium on
Increased Regulatory Burdens”

Return to list of attachments
DRAFT NOTICE OF FINAL RULEMAKING
MARICOPA COUNTY AIR POLLUTION CONTROL REGULATIONS
REGULATION III – CONTROL OF AIR CONTAMINANTS
RULE 322: POWER PLANT OPERATIONS
PREAMBLE
1. Rule affected Rulemaking action
Rule 322: Power Plant Operations Amend
2. Statutory authority for the rulemaking:
Authorizing statutes: A.R.S. §§ 49-474, 49-479, and 49-480
Implementing Statute: A.R.S. § 49-112
3. The effective date of the rule:
Tentative date of adoption: November 2, 2016
4. List of public notices addressing this rulemaking:
Notice of Briefing to Maricopa County Manager: May 2015
Notice of Stakeholder Workshops: June 29, 2015, September 3, 2015, and February 24, 2016
Notice of Maricopa County Board of Health Meeting: April 25, 2016
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking: 22 A.A.R. 1122, May 13, 2016
5. Name and address of department personnel with whom persons may communicate regarding the
rulemaking:
Name: Johanna M. Kuspert or Hether Krause
Maricopa County Air Quality Department
Planning and Analysis Division
Address: 1001 N Central Avenue, Suite 125
Phoenix, Arizona 85004
Telephone: (602) 506-6010
Fax: (602) 506-6179
E-mail: aqplanning@mail.maricopa.gov Return to list of attachments
6. Explanation of the rule, including the department's reasons for initiating the rulemaking:
Summary:
Rule 322 (Power Plant Operations) limits the discharge of nitrogen oxides (NOx), sulfur oxides, particulate
matter and carbon monoxide emissions into the atmosphere from stationary fossil-fuel-fired equipment at
power plants and cogeneration plants. Revisions to Rule 322 are being proposed to address the
requirements of the State Implementation Plan (SIP) for “moderate” nonattainment for the 2008 eight-hour
ozone national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS). The proposed amendments in Rule 322 include
Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT) for NOx.
In addition, the proposed amendments correct typographical or other clerical errors; make minor
grammatical changes to improve readability or clarity; modify the format, numbering, order, capitalization,
punctuation, or syntax of certain text to increase standardization within and among rules; or make various
other minor changes of a purely editorial nature. As these changes do not alter the sense, meaning, or effect
of the rules, they are not described in detail here, but can be readily discerned in the “underline/ strikeout”
version of the rules contained in Item 14 of this notice.

Issues Raised and Discussed During this Rulemaking Process:
Stakeholders expressed a general understanding for the need for rule revisions based on the department’s
nonattainment status; however, Stakeholders were concerned about the emission limitations and what is
considered “RACT” and what is considered “beyond RACT”. Stakeholders requested comparisons to
comparable agencies to see how they have managed to achieve RACT. In addition, questions were raised
regarding the following:
• The stringency of Rule 322 compared to the stringency in the Arizona Department of Environmental
Quality’s (ADEQ’s) rules
• Cost effectiveness and its relationship to RACT and the impact on sources
• Most Achievable Control Technology (MACT) standards and the application to the boiler standards
• The compliance schedule and the timing of when sources must show compliance with the proposed
emission limitations
• The phrase “owner and/or operator” and the implications of responsibility and liability
• Exemptions for equipment operating hours and during startup and shutdown
• The requirements for continuous emission monitoring systems and allowances for alternative methods
Description of Proposed Amendments:
Regarding Applicability:
• Section 102 (Applicability): Rule 322 is proposed to no longer apply only to equipment for which
construction commenced prior to May 10, 1996. Rule 322 is proposed to apply to all equipment, except
for equipment that was built or modified after May 10, 1996 that is already subject to more stringent
federally enforceable standards. This revision will make the rule comply with RACT, while also
recognizing that sources that are complying with more stringent federally and/or locally enforceable
standards are complying with RACT and are therefore in compliance with this rule. Rule 322 is proposed
to include new Section 102.4 (per the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA’s) comment) a
provision that states that facilities subject to Rule 322 may be subject to New Source Performance
Standards (NSPS) and/or National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP).
• Section 104 (Partial Exemptions): Rule 322 is proposed to include a partial exemption for equipment that
operates less than or equal to 10 percent annual capacity factor per calendar year. This revision would
make the rule comply with RACT, while also recognizing that if equipment operates below the specified
rate then such equipment would not be expected to discharge into the atmosphere nitrogen oxides in
excess of the limits specified in the rule and would therefore be in compliance with this rule. Also, Rule
322 is proposed to include the definition of “annual capacity factor” in Section 200; definition is similar
to definition used in 40 CFR Part 63, Subpart DDDDD (National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutants for Major Sources: Industrial, Commercial, and Institutional Boilers and Process Heaters)
• Section 104.1(c) (Partial Exemptions): Rule 322 is proposed to be revised to clarify the partial exemption
for military training facilities. The EPA commented that the term “military training facility” is unclear in
this rule, especially as distinguished from other facilities such as “garrisons”. The EPA suggested that
this exemption should focus on the specific types of activities at these facilities that reasonably require
exemptions, rather than the facilities themselves. The EPA suggested using Imperial County Air
Pollution Control District, Rule 800, Section E(6) (General Requirements for Control of Fine Particulate
Matter (PM10)) as an example. The text proposed in Section 104.1(c) is from Imperial County Air
Pollution Control District, Rule 800, Section E(6) (General Requirements for Control of Fine Particulate
Matter (PM10)).
• Sections 104.2 and 104.3 (Partial Exemptions): Rule 322 is proposed to be revised to include source
specific limitations on emergency fuel use that is or will be incorporated in a source permit. The EPA
commented that engines and fuel use allow alternative emission limits from normal operating conditions;
this is generally allowable but must also include appropriate limits on the length of the emergency
condition and alternative emergency emission limits. EPA asked that the department revise this section.

Regarding Definitions:
• Section 235 (Definition Of “Steady State”): Rule 322 is proposed to include a definition of “steady
state”; the text of the definition is proposed by one of the Stakeholders/sources subject to Rule 322 –
Arizona Public Service (APS). The EPA commented that Rule 322 uses the term “steady state
operation” without further description.
Regarding Limitations for Particulate Matter:
• Sections 301.1 and 301.2: The limitations for particulate matter-fuel type and testing are proposed to be
deleted. Stakeholders commented in January 2016 that Sections 301.1 and 301.2 might not be needed
because equipment cannot use anything other than natural gas for non-emergency purposes.
Regarding Limitations for Nitrogen Oxides (NOx):
• Section 305.1: The NOx limitation when burning gaseous fossil fuel is proposed to be changed from “155
ppmv” to “42 ppmdv”. The EPA has advised that this limitation is considered RACT for NOx; this
limitation is similar to limits in Imperial County’s (CA) RACT SIP for the 1997 ozone standard for
turbines (Rule 400.1 adopted 2010).
• Section 305.2: The NOx limitation when burning liquid fossil fuel is proposed to be changed from “230
ppmv” to “65 ppmdv”. The EPA has advised that this limitation is considered RACT for NOx; this
limitation is similar to limits in Imperial County’s (CA) RACT SIP for the 1997 ozone standard for
turbines (Rule 400.1 adopted 2010).
Regarding Alternative Monitoring Methods:
• Section 200 (Definitions): The definitions of “low mass emissions (LME)” and “predictive emissions
monitoring system (PEMS)” are proposed to be added to Rule 322. The text for the definition of “LME”
is from 40 CFR Part 75 (Acid Rain) and the text for the definition of “PEMS” is from the EPA.
• Section 301 (Good Combustion Practices for Turbines): Rule 322 is proposed to include a provision that
if CEMS or another approved monitoring method is used, good combustion practices for turbines are
considered to have been met.
• Section 301.1 (Good Combustion Practices for Turbines): Rule 322 is proposed to include text regarding
the frequency of monitoring temperature differential across the combustion burners. The EPA
commented that the frequency of differential temperature measurement should be defined and that
continuous monitoring of this differential should be required.
• Section 307.1 (Requirements for Emission Control System (ECS) Monitoring Equipment): Rule 322 is
proposed to include a provision that allows for installing an approved combustion control system (as an
alternative to installing an emission control system (ECS)), in order to comply with the standards of the
rule. Not all “approved combustion control systems” are “emission control systems”; however, approved
combustion control systems should be designed and operated in accordance with good engineering
practices to reduce emissions (which matches the definition of “emission control system”).
• Section 307.3(d) (Operation and Maintenance (O&M) Plan Required for ECS): Rule 322 is proposed to
be clarified to include text that the department inserts into Title V permit renewals, which requires
facilities to comply with O&M Plan revisions upon submittal not department approval.
• Section 307.4 (Continuous Emission Monitoring Systems): Rule 322 is proposed to include other
methods (other than CEMS) for measuring nitrogen oxides.
Regarding Administrative Requirements:
• Sections 401 (In Existence and In Compliance) and 402 (In Existence and Non-Compliant): Rule 322 is
proposed to include compliance schedules for equipment that is in existence and in compliance and in
existence and non-compliant.
• Section 403 (Emergency Standby Units): Rule 322 is proposed to include a compliance schedule for
emergency standby units.

Regarding Compliance Determinations:
• Section 504 (Compliance Determination-Test Methods Incorporated By Reference): Rule 322 is
proposed to include a provision that allows for the use of alternative test methods to determine
compliance with the rule and to clarify the provision regarding when more than one test method is
permitted for a compliance determination.
• Section 504.12 (Compliance Determination-Test Methods Incorporated By Reference): Rule 322 is
proposed to delete the text method “American Society of Testing Materials, ASTM Method D1266-98,
(“Standard Test Method for Sulfur in Petroleum Products - Lamp Method”), 1998”. The EPA
commented that the test method may not be appropriate; its range is 0.01-0.4% which will not be able to
verify compliance with the definition of ultra low sulfur diesel fuel at <0.0015%.
7. Demonstration of compliance with A.R.S. §49-112:
Under A.R.S. § 49-479(C), a county may not adopt a rule or ordinance that is more stringent than the rules
adopted by the Director of the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ) for similar sources
unless it demonstrates compliance with the applicable requirements of A.R.S. §49-112.
§ 49-112 County regulation; standards
§ 49-112(A)
When authorized by law, a county may adopt a rule, ordinance or other regulation that is more stringent
than or in addition to a provision of this title or rule adopted by the director or any board or commission
authorized to adopt rules pursuant to this title if all of the following conditions are met:
1. The rule, ordinance or other regulation is necessary to address a peculiar local condition.
2. There is credible evidence that the rule, ordinance or other regulation is either;
(a) Necessary to prevent a significant threat to public health or the environment that results from a
peculiar local condition and is technically and economically feasible.
(b) Required under a federal statute or regulation, or authorized pursuant to an intergovernmental
agreement with the federal government to enforce federal statutes or regulations if the county rule,
ordinance or other regulation is equivalent to federal statutes or regulation.
3. Any fee or tax adopted under the rule, ordinance or other regulation will not exceed the reasonable
costs of the county to issue and administer that permit or plan approval program.
§ 49-112(B)
When authorized by law, a county may adopt rules, ordinances or other regulations in lieu of a state
program that are as stringent as a provision of this title or rule adopted by the director or any board or
commission authorized to adopt rules pursuant to this title if the county demonstrates that the cost of
obtaining permits or other approvals from the county will approximately equal or be less than the fee or
cost of obtaining similar permits or approvals under this title or any rule adopted pursuant to this title. If the
state has not adopted a fee or tax for similar permits or approvals, the county may adopt a fee when
authorized by law in the rule, ordinance or other regulation that does not exceed the reasonable costs of the
county to issue and administer that permit or plan approval program.
The department complies with A.R.S. § 49-112(A) in that Maricopa County fails to meet the National
Ambient Air Quality Standards for both ozone and particulates. While currently classified as a “marginal”
ozone nonattainment area, the county recently failed to meet 2008 8-hour ozone standard by the marginal
area attainment date and anticipates EPA will issue a notice proposing to re-classify the area to “moderate”.
Further, a portion of the county was classified as a serious ozone nonattainment area under the previous 1-
hour ozone standard requiring the county to continue to maintain the measures and requirements that
allowed the county to attain that standard. Currently, a portion of Maricopa County and Apache Junction in
Pinal County is designated serious nonattainment for the PM10 24-hour standard. This is the only serious
PM10 nonattainment area in Arizona. Revisions to Rule 322 are being proposed to address the requirements
of the State Implementation Plan (SIP) for “moderate” nonattainment for the 2008 eight-hour ozone

national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS). The proposed amendments in Rule 322 include
Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT) for NOx.
The department complies with A.R.S. § 49-112(B) in that the proposed amendments to Rule 322 are not
more stringent than or in addition to a provision of Title 49 or rule adopted by the director or any board or
commission authorized to adopt rules pursuant to Title 49, address the peculiar local conditions in
Maricopa County, are authorized under A.R.S. Title 49, Chapter 3, Article 3, and are not in lieu of a state
program.
8. Documents or studies referenced and/or reviewed for this rulemaking:
Not applicable
9. Showing of good cause why the rule is necessary to promote a statewide interest if the rule will
diminish a previous grant of authority of a political subdivision:
Not applicable
10. Summary of the economic, small business, and consumer impact:
The following discussion addresses each of the elements required for an economic, small business and
consumer impact statement under A.R.S. § 41-1055.
An identification of the rulemaking.
This rulemaking is proposing to revise Rule 322 (Power Plant Operations).
An identification of the persons who will be directly affected by, bear the costs of or directly benefit
from the rulemaking.
The persons who will be directly affected by and bear the costs of this rulemaking will be facilities in
Maricopa County that operate the following types of equipment built or modified before May 10, 1996, that
burn fossil fuel:
- Electric utility steam generating unit or cogeneration steam unit sued to generate electric power that has a
heat input of equal to or greater than 100 MMBtu/hour (20 MW);
- Electric utility stationary gas turbine with a heat input at peak load equal to or greater than 10 MMBtu/hour
(2.9 MW) based upon the lower heating value of the fuel;
- Cooling towers associated with these types of equipment.
The department has issued permits for 5 facilities that are subject to this rule as revised.
A cost benefit analysis of the following:
(a) The probable costs and benefits to the implementing agency and other agencies directly affected
by the implementation and enforcement of the rulemaking.
It is expected that the department will benefit from the increased clarity of the rule with decreased time to
inspect a facility or prepare a permit. In addition, the rulemaking will not impose increased monetary or
regulatory costs on other state agencies, political subdivisions of this state, persons, or individuals so
regulated.
The benefits of the rule revision are anticipated to be a result of the following changes:
- Changing the NOx limitation when burning gaseous fossil fuel from “155 ppmv” to “42 ppmdv” to
conform to federal performance standards;
- Changing the NOx limitation when burning liquid fossil fuel from “230 ppmv” to “65 ppmdv” to
conform to federal performance standards;
- Exempting a source from the NOx limitations and continuous emissions monitoring system requirements
if the source submits a Reasonable Available Control Technology (RACT) evaluation to the Control
Officer if such RACT evaluation if incorporated into the source’s permit;

- Making minor changes of a purely editorial nature, e.g., correct typographical or other clerical errors;
make minor grammatical changes to improve readability;
- Modifying the format, numbering, order, capitalization, punctuation, or syntax of certain text to increase
standardization within and among rules.
The entities with sources subject to revised Rule 322 have submitted a RACT evaluation for their subject
units, and have stated that they will not incur costs for compliance with the rule revisions. In their RACT
evaluation, these entities determined that the most cost-efficient method to meet the RACT NOx limitations
is to limit the hours of operation for particular power plant units. The entities already have similar
limitations in their Title V permits, and as such, there will be no additional burden on them to comply with
the new RACT-based hourly limits.
(b) The probable costs and benefits to a political subdivision of this state directly affected by the
implementation and enforcement of the rulemaking
The rule revisions will not impose increased monetary or regulatory costs on other state agencies, political
subdivisions of this state, persons, or individuals so regulated.
(c) The probable costs and benefits to businesses directly affected by the rulemaking, including any
anticipated effect on the revenues or payroll expenditures of employers who are subject to the
rulemaking.
The department anticipates that increased clarity provided by the Rule 322 revisions will provide a benefit
to the regulated community; it will take less time for sources subject to the rule to understand and comply
with the rule, which leads to increased compliance, which leads to decreased costs of compliance to the
regulated community. The department does not anticipate these rule revisions to have a significant impact
on a person's income, revenue, or employment in this state related to this activity. The rule revision will
not impose increased monetary or regulatory costs on individuals so regulated.
A general description of the probable impact on private and public employment in businesses,
agencies and political subdivisions of this state directly affected by the rulemaking.
The rule revisions will not impose increased monetary or regulatory costs on other state agencies, political
subdivisions of this state, persons, or individuals so regulated.
A statement of the probable impact of the rulemaking on small businesses.
The rule revisions will not impose increased monetary or regulatory costs on any permitted business,
persons, or individuals so regulated.
(a) An identification of the small businesses subject to the rulemaking.
There are no small businesses subject to this rulemaking.
(b) The administrative and other costs required for compliance with the rulemaking.
This rulemaking updates and clarifies existing rule provisions and definitions to be consistent with federal
performance standards, and to reduce confusion and improve understanding and readability. The
department considered the implications of the proposed amendments to the regulated entities and the
implementing agency and deemed that none of the rule revisions have potentially significant economic
impacts.
(c) A description of the methods that the agency may use to reduce the impact on small businesses.
(i) Establishing less costly compliance requirements in the rulemaking for small businesses.
There are no small businesses subject to this rulemaking.
(ii) Establishing less costly schedules or less stringent deadlines for compliance in the rulemaking.
This rulemaking corrects or clarifies existing rule provisions and definitions to reduce confusion and
improve understanding and readability.
(iii) Exempting small businesses from any or all requirements of the rulemaking.

This rulemaking corrects or clarifies existing rule provisions and definitions to reduce confusion and
improve understanding and readability.
(d) The probable cost and benefit to private persons and consumers who are directly affected by the
rulemaking.
This rulemaking will not impose increased monetary or regulatory costs on any permitted business,
persons, or individuals so regulated. As such, there are no costs to pass through to consumers which means
there are no impacts on consumers.
A statement of the probable effect on state revenues.
The rule revisions will not impose increased monetary or regulatory costs on other state agencies, political
subdivisions of this state, persons, or individuals so regulated. Without costs to pass through to customers,
there is no projected change in consumer purchase patterns and, thus, no impact on state revenues from
sales taxes.
A description of any less intrusive or less costly alternative methods of achieving the purpose of the
rulemaking.
This rulemaking corrects or clarifies existing rule provisions and definitions to reduce confusion and
improve understanding and readability.
11. Name and address of department personnel with whom persons may communicate regarding the
accuracy of the economic, small business, and consumer impact:
Name: Johanna M. Kuspert or Hether Krause
Maricopa County Air Quality Department
Planning and Analysis Division
Address: 1001 N Central Avenue, Suite 125
Phoenix, AZ 85004
Telephone: (602) 506-6010
Fax: (602) 506-6179
E-mail: aqplanning@mail.maricopa.gov
12. Description of the changes between the proposed rule, including supplemental notices and final rule:
Since the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking was published on May 13, 2016 (22 A.A.R 1122), the
department is proposing the following additional amendments:
• Section 102 (Applicability): Propose to not include proposed new text “except for equipment that was
built or modified after May 10, 1996 that is already subject to more stringent federally and/or locally
enforceable standards”. The EPA commented in June 2016 that the exception conflicts with the Clean
Air Act requirement that “major sources” in ozone nonattainment areas classified at moderate or higher
must be regulated under a SIP-approved RACT rule. With this proposed amendment, Rule 322 is
proposed to no longer apply only to equipment for which construction commenced prior to May 10,
1996, but rather is proposed to apply to all equipment that is listed in Sections 102.1 through 102.3.
• Section 104.1(c) (Partial Exemptions): Propose to delete the partial exemption for stationary gas turbines
used for military training activities. The EPA commented in June 2016 to remove this exemption or
provide definitions for the terms “military training facilities” and “military gas turbines” and demonstrate
why these gas turbines should not be subject to the specified emission standards.
• Sections 104.2 and 104.3 (Partial Exemptions): Propose to not include proposed new text “and that is or
will be incorporated in a permit issued by the Control Officer for that source” and to not include the text
“which fires an emergency fuel but”. Also, propose to re-phrase the sections to read in part “…as allowed
by a permit”, per the Salt River Project Agricultural Improvement And Power District (SRP) comments.

• Section 104.4 (Partial Exemptions): Propose to not include proposed new text “and that is or will be
incorporated in a permit issued by the Control Officer for that source” and propose to include Section
400 to the list of sections from which the equipment is exempt. The Arizona Public Service Company
(APS) and SRP commented in June 2016 that if the low capacity exemption is linked to an actual permit,
then it would be the equivalent of a case-by-case determination defeating the very purpose of this de
minimis exemption. Also, APS and SRP commented that Section 400 should be included to the list of
sections from which the equipment is exempt. Also, propose to change “less than or equal to” to “at or
below” and to change “10 percent annual capacity factor per calendar year” to “10 percent calendar year
annual capacity factor”.
• Section 201 (Definition Of “Annual Capacity Factor”): Propose to add text to the definition to allow the
definition to apply to steam units as well as gas turbines, per APS and SRP comments.
• Section 218 (Definition Of “Low Sulfur Oil”): Propose to delete the definition of “Low Sulfur Oil”.
Propose to add the definition of “Ultra Low Sulfur Diesel” to be consistent with federal standards.
• Section 220 (Definition Of “Low Mass Emission (LME)”: Propose to not include the proposed definition
of “LME” and to remove the term from Sections 308.4 and 501.5. The EPA commented in June 2016
that LME is not a suitable substitute for Continuous Emissions Monitoring Systems (CEMS) for the
purposes of SIP compliance determination with an emissions limit.
• Section 229 (Definition Of “Predictive Emission Monitoring System (PEMS)”): Propose to not include
the proposed definition of “PEMS” and to remove the term from Sections 308.4 and 501.5. The EPA
commented in June 2016 that the usage of PEMS for compliance purposes be restricted to units with a
heat input rate of 250 MMBtu/hr or less, which aligns with other Federal guidance.
• Section 232 (Definition Of “Steady State”): Propose to include “with equipment in normal operating
conditions” after the phrase “at which a unit”.
• Section 234 (Definition Of “Thirty (30) Day Rolling Average”): Propose to delete the terms “equipment”
and “every hour” and to add text at the end of the definition to make the definition consistent with
common practice, per APS and SRP comments.
• Section 236 (Definition Of “Total Dissolved Solids (TDS)”): Propose to delete the second sentence and
to re-write the first sentence to include test methods for determining TDS. The EPA commented in June
2016 that the second sentence should be removed and the first sentence should be modified to read
“…glass fiber filter, as determined by Test Method XXX”.
• Section 237 (Definition Of “Ultra Low Sulfur Diesel”): Propose to add the definition of “Ultra Low
Sulfur Diesel”. Propose to delete the definition of “Low Sulfur Oil” to be consistent with federal
standards.
• Section 239 (Definition Of “Waste Derived Fuel Gas”): Propose to add the definition of “Waste Derived
Fuel Gas” to be consistent with the other department “engine” rules – Rule 323 (Fuel Burning Equipment
From Industrial/Commercial/Institutional (ICI) Sources) and Rule 324 (Stationary Internal Combustion
(IC) Engines).
• Sections 301.1 and 301.2 (Limitations-Particulate Matter): Propose to not delete Sections 301.1 and
301.2 (the limitations for particulate matter-fuel type and testing). The EPA commented in June 2016 that
Sections 301.1 and 301.2 should either be retained or the County should provide an adequate Clean Air
Act Section 110(l) demonstration, which supports removing these requirements.
• Section 301.1 (Limitations-Particulate Matter): Propose to include “during steady state operations” after
the phrase “more than 0.007 lbs. of particulate matter per MMBtu”.
• Section 302 (Good Combustion Practices For Turbines): Propose to not include proposed new text “good
combustion practices for turbines are considered to have been met” at the end of the last sentence.
Instead, propose to include at the end of the last sentence “then the equipment would be exempt from the
requirements of Section 302 of this rule”. The EPA commented in June 2016 that it appears that the
department intends to say that if equipment is utilizing a CEMS, which already monitors various

operating parameters, then the equipment would be exempt from the requirements of Section 302; revise
accordingly.
• Section 304.2 (Limitations-Opacity): Propose to not change “of” to “or” in the phrase “for up to one hour
during the startup of switching fuels…”. Instead, propose to change “switching fuels” to “fuel switching
startup process” (the term is defined in Rule 322). APS and SRP commented in June 2016 that it would
appear that “of” was the correct choice and should not have been changed. To make it clearer, change
“switching fuel” to “fuel switching startup process”.
• Section 305 (Limitations-Sulfur In Fuel): Propose to change “low sulfur oil” to “ultra low sulfur diesel”
and propose to add a limitation for sulfur in waste derived fuel gas to be consistent with the other
department “engine” rules – Rule 323 (Fuel Burning Equipment From
Industrial/Commercial/Institutional (ICI) Sources) and Rule 324 (Stationary Internal Combustion (IC)
Engines).
• Sections 306.1 and 306.2 (Limitations-Nitrogen Oxides (NOx)): Propose to add Section 400 to the list of
sections from which a source would be exempt. APS commented in June 2016 that the department should
also exempt the case-by-case RACT analysis from the requirements of Section 400 (Administrative
Requirements), since it will conflict with the specific permit limit set forth by the case-by-case analysis.
• Sections 306.3 (Limitations-Nitrogen Oxides (NOx)): Propose to add “during steady state operations” to
the end of the last sentence to be consistent with similar standard in Section 307 (Limitations-Carbon
Monoxide).
• Section 307 (Limitations-Carbon Monoxide): Propose to not include proposed new text “and combined
cycle gas turbines” to the end of the second-to-the-last sentence. Instead, propose to add the phrase to the
last sentence. APS commented in June 2016 that the department incorrectly placed combined cycle gas
turbines in the 3% oxygen correction factor section. The correct location of combined cycle gas turbines
is within the 15% oxygen correction factor section; this change lines up Sections 306.3 and 307 to have
consistent factors.
• Section 308.1 (Requirements For ECS Monitoring Equipment): Propose to not include the proposed new
text “or another approved combustion control system” at the end-of the sentence in Section 307.1. The
EPA commented in June 2016 that the definition of “approved combustion control equipment” is unclear.
The EPA commented that the EPA must review and approve any such alternative control systems if the
criteria are not specific enough. The EPA asked that the County define the criteria for approval. Instead,
the department proposes to include proposed new text “a combustion control system which reduces
emissions to below the applicable standards in Section 300 of this rule”.
• Section 308.4(b) (Requirements For ECS Monitoring Equipment-Emission Compliance Demonstration):
Propose to not include the proposed new text “or other monitoring system approved by the Control
Officer” in Section 308.4(b). The EPA commented in June 2016 that the inclusion of “other monitoring
system approved by the Control Officer” is an inappropriate allowance of Director’s discretion; remove
this statement or require EPA approval.
• Section 401 (Administrative Requirements-In Existence And In Compliance): Propose to clarify that this
section is not intended for units exempt in Section 104.4 by an annual capacity factor equal to or less
than 10% or for units which are accepting a case-by-case RACT determination approved by the Control
Officer and propose to include a compliance path for those sources which operate a unit below a 10%
capacity factor or under a case-by-case RACT limitation and in the future elect to increase operations and
may need to then come into compliance with the limits in Section 306, per APS and SRP comments.
• Section 402.1 (Administrative Requirements-In Existence And Non-Compliant): Propose to clarify that
this section is not intended for units exempt in Section 104.4 by an annual capacity factor equal to or less
than 10% or for units which are accepting a case-by-case RACT determination approved by the Control
Officer. Also, propose to not include the proposed last sentence regarding “interim compliance”. APS
commented in June 2016 that “interim compliance” does not appear to relate to the rulemaking; there are
no “interim compliance” options in the rule.

• Section 402.3 (Administrative Requirements-In Existence And Non-Compliance-Removal From
Service): Propose to make this section more functional for retiring units by making the effectiveness of
the section not linked to the adoption of the rule but rather linked to the decision by the owner to retire
the unit, per APS and SRP comments.
• Section 402.3(c) (Administrative Requirements-In Existence And Non-Compliance-Removal From
Service): Propose to remove the one month discrepancy in the sentences in the section. Propose to revise
the timeframes so they match.
• Section 403 (Administrative Requirements-Emergency Standby Units): Propose to change “electric
utility stationary gas turbine, electric utility steam generating unit or cogeneration steam generating unit
used to generate electric power” to “emergency standby unit”. APS and SRP commented in June 2016
that this section should address emergency standby units.
• Section 501.6 (Recordkeeping And Reporting-Good Combustion Practices): Propose to not include
proposed new text “good combustion practices for turbines are considered to have been met” at the end
of the last sentence. Instead, propose to include at the end of the last sentence “then the equipment would
be exempt from the requirements of Section 302 of this rule”. The EPA commented in June 2016 that it
appears that the department intends to say that if equipment is utilizing a CEMS, which already monitors
various operating parameters, then the equipment would be exempt from the requirements of Section
302; revise accordingly.
• Section 501.7 (Recordkeeping And Reporting-Equipment Referenced In Sections 104.4, 306.1, And
306.2): Propose to change “covering a 12-month rolling period” to “of the annual capacity factor and
NOx emissions”. APS and SRP commented in June 2016 that a 12-month rolling period conflicts with
the limits in Sections 306.1 and 306.2, which are concentrations measured during a test conducted
annually and also with the measurement of the annual capacity factor.
• Section 503.1 (Compliance Determination-Low Sulfur Oil Verification): Propose to change “low sulfur
oil” to “ultra low sulfur diesel” and to clarify that sulfur content verification documents must provide
accurate values and be based on enforceable test methods to determine sulfur content.
• Section 503.3 (Compliance Determination-Waste Derived Fuel Gas-Sulfur Verification): Propose to add
a provision for verifying sulfur content in waste derived fuel gas to be consistent with the other
department “engine” rules – Rule 323 (Fuel Burning Equipment From
Industrial/Commercial/Institutional (ICI) Sources) and Rule 324 (Stationary Internal Combustion (IC)
Engines).
• Section 504 (Compliance Determination-Test Methods Incorporated By Reference): Propose to delete the
provision allowing test methods to be used upon sole approval by the Control Officer and propose to add
text that allows test methods as approved by the Administrator to be used, per the EPA’s comments.
• Section 504.15 (Compliance Determination-Test Methods Incorporated By Reference): Propose to add
ASTM D5907-13, Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater for Filterable Matter
(Total Dissolved Solids) and Nonfilterable Matter (Total Suspended Solids) in Water; test method is
referenced in the definition of “Total Dissolved Solids (TDS)”.
• Section 504.16 (Compliance Determination-Test Methods Incorporated By Reference): Propose to add
test method for determining the sulfur content in waste derived fuel gas to be consistent with the other
department “engine” rules – Rule 323 (Fuel Burning Equipment From
Industrial/Commercial/Institutional (ICI) Sources) and Rule 324 (Stationary Internal Combustion (IC)
Engines); test method is referenced in Section 503.3.
13. Summary of the comments made regarding the rule and the department response to them:
Since the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking was published on May 13, 2016 (22 A.A.R. 1122), the
department received comments from the Arizona Public Service Company (APS), Salt River Project
Agricultural Improvement and Power District (SRP), and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA). The comments and the department’s responses are provided below.
Comment #1: Section 102 (Applicability)
Return to list of attachments

The draft rule states that subject equipment built or modified after May 10, 1996 must comply with the
limits in this rule, unless the equipment is already subject to more stringent federally enforceable standards,
such as NSPS and NESHAPs standards. This exception conflicts with the Clean Air Act requirement that
“major sources” in ozone nonattainment areas classified at moderate or higher must be regulated under a
SIP-approved RACT rule. If the County determines that different levels of RACT are appropriate for
different types, sizes, or ages of equipment, the EPA recommends outlining separate emission limits for
these different classes of equipment.
Response #1: Section 102 (Applicability)
The department proposes to not include proposed new text “except for equipment that was built or
modified after May 10, 1996 that is already subject to more stringent federally and/or locally enforceable
standards”. With this proposed amendment, Rule 322 is proposed to no longer apply only to equipment for
which construction commenced prior to May 10, 1996, but rather is proposed to apply to all equipment that
is listed in Sections 102.1 through 102.3.
Comment #2: Section 104.1(c) (Partial Exemptions)
This provision provides that gas turbines used for military training facilities and military gas turbines used
anywhere other than a garrison are exempt from the listed sections. The EPA asks that the County remove
this exemption or provide definitions for the terms “military training facilities” and “military gas turbines”
and demonstrate in the rule’s Staff report why these gas turbines should not be subject to the specified
emission standards.
Response #2: Section 104.1(c) (Partial Exemptions)
The department proposes to delete the partial exemption for stationary gas turbines used for military
training activities.
Comment #3: Sections 104.2 And 104.3 (Partial Exemptions)
The County proposed adding the statement “and that is or will be incorporated in a permit issued by the
Control Officer”. To add clarity to the intent of the language, SRP proposes changes this phrase to “as long
as this is allowed by a permit issued by the Control Officer for that source”.
Response #3: Sections 104.2 And 104.3 (Partial Exemptions)
The department proposes to not include proposed new text “and that is or will be incorporated in a permit
issued by the Control Officer for that source” and to not include the text “which fires an emergency fuel
but”. Rather than including new text “as long as this is allowed by a permit issued by the Control Officer
for that source”, the department proposes to re-phrase the sections to read in part “…as allowed by a
permit…”
Comment #4: Section 104.4 (Partial Exemptions)
For units that operate at a low capacity factor (10% or less), the County has proposed a de minimis partial
exemption. This partial exemption makes sense and works for several APS units that operate at low levels.
However, between the final stakeholder workshop and the Proposed Rulemaking, the County added a
counterintuitive requirement that an exempt unit would somehow need to operate under a specific permit
limit. Upon reflection, we hope that the County can see the troubles caused by this position. The purpose of
Section 104.4 is to provide a partial exemption from the requirements of Section 305, 306, 307.4 and 400
for units that operate at a low capacity factor. If the 10% is linked to an actual permit, then it would be the
equivalent of a case-by-case determination under 305.1 defeating the very purpose of this de minimis
exemption. Any unit operating under a Section 104.4 partial exemption is still required to keep records. If
the unit exceeds the 10% threshold, this exemption no longer applies. At that time the unit would then no
longer be excluded from Section 305 and would need to meet RACT through installation of control
equipment or seek a case-by-case determination under Section 305.1 which would result in a permit limit.
Accordingly, limiting this de minimis exemption by requiring a permit limits defeats the purpose of the
partial exemption. To resolve this issue, APS recommends that the County remove the phrase “and that is
or will be incorporated in a permit issued by the Control Officer for that source” from the sentence and add
“and 400” to the sentence.

Response #4: Section 104.4 (Partial Exemptions)
The department proposes to not include proposed new text “and that is or will be incorporated in a permit
issued by the Control Officer for that source” and proposes to include Section 400 to the list of sections
from which the equipment is exempt. Also, the department proposes to change “less than or equal to” to “at
or below” and to change “10 percent annual capacity factor per calendar year” to “10 percent calendar year
annual capacity factor”.
Comment #5: Section 104.4 (Partial Exemptions)
The proposed rule language would require a specific permit limitation. The revisions to Rule 322 already
incorporate a pathway for compliance if a unit which has taken the partial exemption exceeds a 10% annual
capacity factor. This would trigger an emissions limitation in Section 305 and a compliance demonstration
in Section 401, and therefore there is no need for a specific limit to be incorporated into the permit.
Additionally, units using this annual capacity factor partial exemption in Section 104.4, as well as units that
submit a case-by-case reasonably available control technology (RACT) analysis in Sections 305.1 and
305.2 should be exempted from Section 400, as this section lists the requirements for notification of
compliance and avenues to come into compliance, neither of which must be followed by units exempted by
a low annual capacity factor or complying through a case-by-case RACT. Therefore, SRP proposes that the
County revert to the previous draft language and add an exemption from Section 400.
Response #5: Section 104.4 (Partial Exemptions)
The department proposes to not include proposed new text “and that is or will be incorporated in a permit
issued by the Control Officer for that source” and proposes to include Section 400 to the list of sections
from which the equipment is exempt. Also, the department proposes to change “less than or equal to” to “at
or below” and to change “10 percent annual capacity factor per calendar year” to “10 percent calendar year
annual capacity factor”.
Comment #6: Section 104.4 (Partial Exemptions)
The draft rule language presumes that equipment operating at less than or equal to 10% annual capacity
factor is exempt from NOx and CO limits and is exempt from emission control monitoring system
requirements in Sections 305, 306, and 307.4. To ensure enforceability, the EPA asks that the County
please provide a definition for the term “annual capacity factor” in Section 200.
Response #6: Section 104.4 (Partial Exemptions)
The department proposes to include a definition of “Annual Capacity Factor” in Section 200.
Comment #7: Section 201 (Definition Of “Annual Capacity Factor”)
The original definition was lacking a relationship to gas turbines. APS suggests the following change to
allow it to apply to steam units as well as gas turbines. Add to the end of the last sentence “or the ratio
between the actual electrical output of a machine or equipment during a calendar year and the potential
electrical output of a machine or equipment had it been operated for 8,760 hours at full nameplate
capacity”.
Response #7: Section 201 (Definition Of “Annual Capacity Factor”)
The department proposes to add text to the definition of “Annual Capacity Factor” to allow the definition to
apply to steam units as well as gas turbines.
Comment #8: Section 201 (Definition Of “Annual Capacity Factor”)
The definition of “Annual Capacity Factor” is specific to boilers and/or process heaters. In order to make
the definition more generic so it can apply to combustion turbines too, SRP proposes adding to the end of
the last sentence the phrase “or the ratio between the actual electrical output of a machine or equipment
during a calendar year and the potential electrical output of a machine or equipment had it been operated
for 8,760 hours during a year at full nameplate capacity.”
Response #8: Section 201 (Definition Of “Annual Capacity Factor”)

The department proposes to add to the end of the last sentence of the definition of “Annual Capacity
Factor” the phrase “or the ratio between the actual electrical output of a machine or equipment during a
calendar year and the potential electrical output of a machine or equipment had it been operated for 8,760
hours during a year at full nameplate capacity.”
Comment #9: Section 234 (Definition Of “Thirty (30) Day Rolling Average”)
The 30-day rolling average equation can be deceptively complex. To help make the definition as clear as
possible, APS suggests the following changes: Delete “equipment” between “combustion” and “operating”
and delete “every hour” at the end of the sentence. Add “at the conclusion of each day for the previous 30
operating” between “CEMS” and “days”.
Response #9: Section 234 (Definition Of “Thirty (30) Day Rolling Average”)
The department proposes to delete the terms “equipment” and “every hour” and to add text at the end of the
definition of “Thirty (30) Day Rolling Average” to make the definition consistent with common practice.
Comment #10: Section 234 (Definition Of “Thirty (30) Day Rolling Average”)
SRP proposes a different definition for “Thirty (30) Day Rolling Average” which is more consistent with
common practice: “An arithmetic mean or average of all hourly emission rates for 30 successive
combustion operating days and calculated by a CEMS at the conclusion of each day for the previous 30
operating days”.
Response #10: Section 234 (Definition Of “Thirty (30) Day Rolling Average”)
The department proposes to delete the terms “equipment” and “every hour” and to add text at the end of the
definition of “Thirty (30) Day Rolling Average” to make the definition consistent with common practice.
Comment #11: Section 236 (Definition Of “Total Dissolved Solids (TDS”)
The second sentence in the definition of “Total Dissolved Solids (TDS)” appears to describe the
methodology that should be used to determine TDS. The EPA asks that the County remove the second
sentence and re-write the first sentence to read “…glass fiber filter, as determined by Test Method XXX.”
Response #11: Section 236 (Definition Of “Total Dissolved Solids (TDS)”)
The department proposes to remove the second sentence and to re-write the first sentence to include test
methods for determining TDS.
Comment #12: Section 301 (Limitations-Particulate Matter)
The EPA comments that the current language in Section 301 (Limitations-Particulate Matter) proposed for
deletion only applies to two units constructed prior to 1996. Either retain these limits for those units at a
minimum or provide an adequate Clean Air Act Section 110(l) demonstration which supports removing
these requirements for those units.
Response #12: Section 301 (Limitations-Particulate Matter)
The department proposes to not delete Sections 301.1 and 301.2 (the limitations for particulate matter-fuel
type and testing).
Comment #13: Section 302 (Good Combustion Practices For Turbines)
The draft rule language appears to state that “good combustion practices” are met for turbines if CEMS are
used (last sentence). It appears that the County intends to say that if equipment is utilizing a CEMS, which
already monitors various operating parameters, then the equipment would be exempt from the requirements
of Section 302. The EPA asks that the County revise accordingly if this is correct or otherwise clarify the
intent of this last sentence. This provision is also found in Section 501.6.
Response #13: Section 302 (Good Combustion Practices For Turbines)
The department proposes to not include proposed new text “good combustion practices for turbines are
considered to have been met” at the end of the last sentence. Instead, the department proposes to include at

the end of the last sentence “then the equipment would be exempt from the requirements of Section 302 of
this rule”.
Comment #14: Section 304.2 (Limitations-Opacity)
Section 304.2 appears to be related to the issue of fuel switching. The change proposed by the County
seems to confuse the matter by inserting “or” into the sentence in place of “of”. If would appear that “of”
was the correct choice and should not have been changed. To make it clearer, APS would suggest changing
“switching fuel” to “fuel switching”, which lines up better with the final sentence in that section which also
uses “fuel switching”.
Response #14: Section 304.2 (Limitations-Opacity)
The department proposes to not change “of” to “or” in the phrase “for up to one hour during the startup of
switching fuels…”. Instead, the department proposes to change “switching fuels” to “fuel switching startup
process” (the term is defined in Rule 322).
Comment #15: Section 304.2 (Limitations-Opacity)
The County seems to inadvertently have replaced the word “of” in the second sentence with the word “or”.
This should be changed back to “of” since the exemption allowed by this section pertains to the first hour
during startup of fuel switching for those units that are allowed to fire emergency fuels. To avoid future
confusions with this section of the rule, SRP proposes that the County consistently use the term “fuel
switching startup process” throughout the rule, as defined in Section 217 (Definition of “Fuel Switching
Startup Process”).
Response #15: Section 304.2 (Limitations-Opacity)
The department proposes to not change “of” to “or” in the phrase “for up to one hour during the startup of
switching fuels…”. Instead, the department proposes to change “switching fuels” to “fuel switching startup
process” (the term is defined in Rule 322).
Comment #16: Section 306 (Limitations-Nitrogen Oxides (NOx))
As part of the RACT assessment, a unit may choose to use a case-by-case RACT analysis. The County has
made provision for the case-by-case RACT analysis within Sections 306.1 and 306.2. Because the case-by-
case RACT analysis is separate from the emission limit in Sections 306.1 and 306.2, the County correctly
sought to exempt the case-by-case RACT analysis from these sections. However, it is important that the
County also exempt the case-by-case RACT analysis from the requirements of Section 400 (parts 401 and
402), since it will conflict with the specific permit limit set forth by the case-by-case analysis. Accordingly,
APS recommends that the County insert “Section 400” into the exemptions listed in Sections 306.1 and
306.2.
Response #16: Section 306 (Limitations-Nitrogen Oxides (NOx))
The department proposes to add Section 400 to the list of sections from which a source would be exempt.
Comment #17: Section 307 (Limitations-Carbon Monoxide)
The County appears to have misplaced some clarifying language that was offered during the final
workshop. In Section 307, the County incorrectly placed combined cycle gas turbines in the 3% oxygen
correction factor section. The correct location of combined cycle gas turbines is within the 15% oxygen
correction factor section, not the 3% section. This change also lines up Section 306.3 to have consistent
factors.
Response #17: Section 307 (Limitations-Carbon Monoxide)
The department proposes to not include proposed new text “and combined cycle gas turbines” to the end of
the second-to-the-last sentence. Instead, the department proposes to add the phrase to the last sentence.
Comment #18: Section 307 (Limitations-Carbon Monoxide)
SRP believes the County incorrectly inserted “…and combined cycle gas turbines” in the wrong sentence
of Section 307. That language should be inserted in the last sentence of that section: “The CO concentration

shall be measured dry and corrected to 15% oxygen for stationary turbines and combined cycle gas
turbines, during steady state operations”.
Response #18: Section 307 (Limitations-Carbon Monoxide)
The department proposes to not include proposed new text “and combined cycle gas turbines” to the end of
the second-to-the-last sentence. Instead, the department proposes to add the phrase to the last sentence.
Comment #19: Section 308.1 (Requirements For ECS Monitoring Equipment)
The definition of “approved combustion control equipment” is unclear. The EPA asks that the County
define the criteria for approval. The EPA must review and approve any such alternative control systems if
the criteria are not specific enough.
Response #19: Section 308.1 (Requirements For ECS Monitoring Equipment)
The department proposes to not include proposed new text “or another approved combustion control
system” at the end-of the sentence in Section 308.1. Instead, the department proposes to include new text “a
combustion control system which reduces emissions to below the applicable standards in Section 300 of
this rule”.
Comment #20: Section 308.4 (Requirements For ECS Monitoring Equipment-Emission Compliance
Demonstration)
The EPA recognizes that a Predictive Emissions Monitoring System (PEMS), if certified in accordance
with the applicable provisions of Performance Specification 16, may be appropriate for certain emissions
units. The EPA recommends, in their comments in June 2016, that their usage for compliance purposes be
restricted to units with a heat input rate of 250 MMBtu/hr or less, which aligns with other Federal guidance.
Response #20: Section 308.4 (Requirements For ECS Monitoring Equipment-Emission Compliance
Demonstration)
The department proposes to not include the proposed definition of “PEMS” and to remove the term from
Sections 308.4 and 501.5.
Comment #21: Section 308.4(b) (Requirements For ECS Monitoring Equipment-Emission Compliance
Demonstration)
The inclusion of “other monitoring system approved by the Control Officer” is an inappropriate allowance
of Director’s discretion. The EPA asks the County to remove this statement or require EPA approval.
Response #21: Section 308.4(b) (Requirements For ECS Monitoring Equipment-Emission Compliance
Demonstration)
The department proposes to not include the proposed new text “or other monitoring system approved by the
Control Officer” in Section 308.4(b).
Comment #22: Section 308.4(b) (Requirements For ECS Monitoring Equipment-Emission Compliance
Demonstration)
The provision that allows the Control Officer to approve any other monitoring system to be equivalent to a
CEMS is too broad. The EPA asks the County to strike this language or also require that the EPA must
approve any such alternative monitoring system.
Response #22: Section 308.4(b) (Requirements For ECS Monitoring Equipment-Emission Compliance
Demonstration)
The department proposes to not include the proposed new text “or other monitoring system approved by the
Control Officer” in Section 308.4(b).
Comment #23: Section 308.4(b) (Requirements For ECS Monitoring Equipment-Emission Compliance
Demonstration)

The EPA comments that Low Mass Emissions (LME) as cited in Sections 219 and 308.4 is not a suitable
substitute for Continuous Emissions Monitoring Systems (CEMS) for the purposes of SIP compliance
determination with an emissions unit
Response #23: Section 308.4(b) (Requirements For ECS Monitoring Equipment-Emission Compliance
Demonstration)
The department proposes to not include the proposed definition of “LME” and to remove the term from
Sections 308.4 and 501.5.
Comment #24: Section 401 (Administrative Requirements-In Existence And In Compliance)
Section 400 is the operative section that helps define how the RACT standard will be implemented by the
affected units. There are several disconnects and inconsistencies that should be addressed to make this
section work as intended. First, it is important to make sure that partially exempt units are not pulled into
Section 400. For example, Section 104.4 is a partial exemption as long as the unit maintains a capacity
factor of 10% or less, and should not be required to comply with Section 400. In fact, it would be
inconsistent, if not impossible, to do both. Second, it is important that any unit which chooses to undertake
a case-by-case RACT analysis under Section 305.1 not be required to also comply with Section 400. That
analysis is outside the scope of Section 400. Accordingly, a case-by-case RACT analysis under Section
305.1 should be exempt from Section 400. Third, the proposed rule language in Section 401 states that the
owner of a unit “in compliance with” Section 305 shall submit a Notification of Compliance. It would
appear that a better way to say this is to say “and subject to”, since it will trigger the obligation, rather than
assuming one is already met. Fourth-relates to the timeframe for submitting a notice. The proposed rule set
the timeframe at 6 months from rule adoption. However, this creates a disconnect for a unit that may be
exempt under Section 104.4 for a year because it ran at a capacity factor of less than 10%. If that unit in
year two exceeded the partial exemption capacity factor and needed to comply with Section 305, there is no
way it could submit a notice 6 months from rule adoption. Accordingly, APS thinks it would read better if
the section said “6 months from becoming subject to Section 305 limits”. Fifth-is to create a correlation
between Step 1 (Section 401) and Step 2 (Section 402). If a unit cannot submit a Notification of
Compliance, there needs to be an “if-then” response. APS proposes the language that says if you cannot
comply with Section 401, then go to Section 402. Currently, the two sections are not linked and this creates
a disconnect.
Response #24: Section 401 (Administrative Requirements-In Existence And In Compliance)
The department proposes to clarify that this section is not intended for units exempt in Section 104.4 by an
annual capacity factor equal to or less than 10% or for units which are accepting a case-by-case RACT
determination approved by the Control Officer and the department proposes to include a compliance path
for those sources which operate a unit below a 10% capacity factor or under a case-by-case RACT
limitation and in the future elect to increase operations and may need to then come into compliance with
the limits in Section 306.
Comment #25: Section 401 (Administrative Requirements-In Existence And In Compliance)
Section 401 is intended for those units which are (or will be) in compliance with the NOx limits in Section
305 by the date this rule is adopted. This section is not intended for units exempted in Section 104.4 by an
annual capacity factor equal to or less than 10% or for units which are accepting a case-by-case RACT
determination approved by the Control Officer and this should be clarified. Additionally, this section is
missing a compliance path for those sources which operate a unit below a 10% capacity factor or under a
case-by-case RACT limitation and in the future elect to increase operations and may need to then come into
compliance with the limits in Section 305. Therefore, SRP is proposing to add to the beginning of the first
sentence in Section 401 the phrase “except as set forth in Sections 104.4 and 305.1 of this rule”.
Response #25: Section 401 (Administrative Requirements-In Existence And In Compliance)
The department proposes to clarify that this section is not intended for units exempt in Section 104.4 by an
annual capacity factor equal to or less than 10% or for units which are accepting a case-by-case RACT
determination approved by the Control Officer and the department proposes to include a compliance path
for those sources which operate a unit below a 10% capacity factor or under a case-by-case RACT

limitation and in the future elect to increase operations and may need to then come into compliance with
the limits in Section 306.
Comment #26: Section 402.1 (Administrative Requirements-In Existence And Non-Compliant)
APS would recommend adding the exceptions of Sections 104.4 and 305.1 to Section 402. Additionally,
APS would recommend deleting the last sentence of Section 402, as it does not appear to relate to the
rulemaking. APS is unaware of any “interim compliance” options within the rule.
Response #26: Section 402.1 (Administrative Requirements-In Existence And Non-Compliant)
The department proposes to clarify that this section is not intended for units exempt in Section 104.4 by an
annual capacity factor equal to or less than 10% or for units which are accepting a case-by-case RACT
determination approved by the Control Officer. Also, the department proposes to not include the proposed
last sentence regarding “interim compliance”.
Comment #27: Section 402.3 (Administrative Requirements-In Existence And Non-Compliance-Removal
From Service)
This section provides an avenue for units that would be retired from service in lieu of emissions controls or
a case-by-case RACT analysis and permit limit. To make this section more functional for the retiring units,
it is important to make the effectiveness of the section not linked to the adoption of the rule, but rather
linked to the decision by the owner to retire the unit. For example, Section 402.3 limits the window of
opportunity to only 24 months. If a Section 104.4 partial exemption unit is exempt for 2 years and then
exceeds its capacity factor, rather than installing emissions controls to meet Section 305, it may seek
removal from service. As proposed, this would not be possible since this section would only be available
for 24 months after the rule is adopted. Instead, APS suggests that Section 402.3 be based on when a unit
otherwise becomes subject to Section 305 emission limits. The offered language makes this possible
without changing obligations on existing units which do not have a partial exemption. The second issue is
to add a similar scope to the Section 402.3(a) which, as written, limits the ability of a unit to submit a
notice for removal from service to only 6 months after rule adoption. As noted above, by linking it to when
a unit becomes subject to Section 305 emissions limits provides an option for units which may be otherwise
exempt during the first 6 months after the rule is adopted. The third issue is to remove the requirement for
“requesting an exemption” and instead require that the owner or operator merely submit a notice of
proposed removal. This reduces the burden on the County to create and issue an exemption when there is
no reason for the extra paperwork. Additionally, it reduces any delay caused by waiting on the County to
issue the exemption. As amended, the unit would submit the notice and then proceed to the formal
submittal of the decommissioning plant and permit revision, which is the document upon which the County
can focus its efforts. Finally, Section 402.3(c) appears to have a mismatch between the use of 4 months of
plan approval and in the final sentence a limitation on operations past 3 months. This inconsistency can be
fixed by merely changing the 3 months to 4 months.
Response #27: Section 402.3 (Administrative Requirements-In Existence And Non-Complianct-Removal
From Service)
The department proposes to make this section more functional for retiring units by making the effectiveness
of the section not linked to the adoption of the rule but rather linked to the decision by the owner to retire
the unit.
Comment #28: Section 402.3 (Administrative Requirements-In Existence And Non-Compliance-Removal
From Service)
Section 402.3 defines the requirements for units that will be removed from service within 24 months of the
rule being adopted. Such units will exempt from the limits of Section 305 as long as the owner or operator
notifies the County of the intent to remove from service within 6 months of rule adoption. To avoid any
delays in the timing of the notification, the decommissioning plan and permit revision (required in Section
402.3(b)), SRP proposes this section require a notification of removal of service, rather than requesting an
exemption, which is already granted in the previous paragraph in that rule section. This section is also
missing a compliance path for those sources which operate a unit below a 10% capacity factor or under a
case-by-case RACT limitation and in the future elect to increase operations and may need to then come into

compliance with the limits in Section 305. SRP suggests removing the phrase “requesting an exemption
from the emission limits in Section 305 of this rule” and removing the phrase “receiving the exemption”.
Response #28: Section 402.3 (Administrative Requirements-In Existence And Non-Complianct-Removal
From Service)
The department proposes to make this section more functional for retiring units by making the effectiveness
of the section not linked to the adoption of the rule but rather linked to the decision by the owner to retire
the unit.
Comment #29: Section 402.3(c) (Administrative Requirements-In Existence And Non-Compliant-Removal
From Service)
There is a one month discrepancy in the sentences in this section; it makes it seem as if the County is
requiring affected sources that choose to take the full 4 months after plan/revision approval to discontinue
operations to come into compliance with the limits of the rule (and possibly install controls) for one month
before the final removal from service. SRP believes that to make this section clearer, the timeframes should
be revised to match.
Response #29: Section 402.3(c) (Administrative Requirements-In Existence And Non-Compliant-Removal
From Service)
The department proposes to remove the one month discrepancy in the sentences in the section. The
department proposes to revise the timeframes so they match.
Comment #30: Section 403 (Administrative Requirements-Emergency Standby Units)
In this Section, the County appears to be limiting the affected units to “emergency standby units”; however,
the sentence includes all affected units. APS comments that the solution for this paragraph would be to
limit the affected units.
Response #30: Section 403 (Administrative Requirements-Emergency Standby Units)
The department proposes to change “electric utility stationary gas turbine, electric utility steam generating
unit or cogeneration steam generating unit used to generate electric power” to “emergency standby unit”.
Comment #31: Section 403(Administrative Requirements-Emergency Standby Units)
SRP comments that Section 403 incorrectly addresses electric utility stationary gas turbines, electric utility
steam generating units and cogeneration steam generating units, when the section should be addressed to
emergency standby units only.
Response #31: Section 403 (Administrative Requirements-Emergency Standby Units)
The department proposes to change “electric utility stationary gas turbine, electric utility steam generating
unit or cogeneration steam generating unit used to generate electric power” to “emergency standby unit”.
Comment #32: Section 501.6 (Recordkeeping)
The draft rule language appears to state that “good combustion practices” are met for turbines if CEMS are
used (last sentence). It appears that the County intends to say that if equipment is utilizing a CEMS, which
already monitors various operating parameters, then the equipment would be exempt from the requirements
of Section 301. The EPA asks that the County revise accordingly if this is correct or otherwise clarify the
intent of this last sentence. This provision is also found in Section 501.6.
Response #32: Section 501.6 (Recordkeeping)
The department proposes to not include proposed new text “good combustion practices for turbines are
considered to have been met” at the end of the last sentence. Instead, the department proposes to include at
the end of the last sentence “then the equipment would be exempt from the requirements of Section 302 of
this rule”.
Comment #33: Section 501.7 (Recordkeeping)

Under the recordkeeping requirements, the County proposes that the records demonstrating compliance
with Sections 104.4, 305.1, and 305.2 include 12 month rolling averages. The inclusion of “12 month
rolling period” conflicts with the measurements set forth in Section 305.1 and 305.2. The general purpose
of this section appears to be a requirement to keep records. By eliminating the contradictory language, APS
can still maintain the necessary records and not introduce confusion to the compliance obligation.
Response #33: Section 501.7 (Recordkeeping)
The department proposes to change “covering a 12-month rolling period” to “of the annual capacity factor
and NOx emissions”.
Comment #34: Section 501.7 (Recordkeeping)
While SRP agrees that records must be kept to demonstrate compliance with the annual capacity factor and
the limitations, a “12-month rolling period” conflicts with the limits in Sections 305.1 and 305.2, which are
concentrations measured during a test conducted annually, and also with the measurement of the annual
capacity factor. SRP proposes the following: “Records of the annual capacity factor and NOx emissions
demonstrating compliance with Sections 104.4, 305.1 and 305.2”.
Response #34: Section 501.7 (Recordkeeping)
The department proposes to change “covering a 12-month rolling period” to “of the annual capacity factor
and NOx emissions”.
Comment #35: Section 504 (Compliance Determination-Test Methods Incorporated By Reference)
Alterative test methods may not be used upon sole approval by the Control Officer. The EPA asks the
County to delete this provision or include language that also requires EPA approval for alternative
methods.
Response #35: Section 504 (Compliance Determination-Test Methods Incorporated By Reference)
The department proposes to delete the provision allowing test methods to be used upon sole approval by the
Control Officer and proposes to add text that allows test methods as approved by the Administrator to be
used.
14. Any other matters prescribed by statute that are applicable to the specific department or to any
specific rule or class of rules:
Not applicable
15. Incorporations by reference and their location in the rule:
The department incorporated by reference sections of the Code of Federal Regulations in the following
sections of the rule:
Section 308.4 (Continuous Emission Monitoring Systems)
Section 504 (Compliance Determination-Test Methods Incorporated By Reference)
16. Was this rule previously an emergency rule?
No
Return to list of attachments
17. Full text of the rule follows:
MARICOPA COUNTY
AIR POLLUTION CONTROL REGULATIONS
REGULATION III - CONTROL OF AIR CONTAMINANTS
RULE 322
POWER PLANT OPERATIONS
INDEX

SECTION 100-GENERAL
101 PURPOSE
102 APPLICABILITY
103 EXEMPTIONS
104 PARTIAL EXEMPTIONS
SECTION 200-DEFINITIONS
201 ANNUAL CAPACITY FACTOR
201 202 COGENERATION STEAM GENERATING UNIT
202 203 COMBINED CYCLE GAS TURBINE
203 204 CONTINUOUS EMISSION MONITORING SYSTEM (CEMS)
204 205 COOLING TOWERS
205 206 CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN (CAP)
206 207 DISTILLATE OIL
207 208 DRIFT
208 209 DRIFT ELIMINATOR
209 210 DRIFT RATE
210 211 ELECTRIC UTILITY STATIONARY GAS TURBINE
211 212 ELECTRIC UTILITY STEAM GENERATING UNIT
212 213 EMERGENCY FUEL
214 EMERGENCY STANDBY UNIT
213 215 EMISSION CONTROL SYSTEM (ECS)
214 216 FOSSIL FUEL
215 217 FUEL SWITCHING STARTUP PROCESS
216 218 HEAT INPUT
217 219 HIGHER HEATING VALUE (HHV) OR GROSS HEATING VALUE
218 LOW SULFUR OIL
219 220 LOWER HEATING VALUE (LHV) OR NET HEATING VALUE
220 221 NATURAL GAS CURTAILMENT
221 222 OPACITY
223 OPERATING DAY
222 224 PARTICULATE MATTER EMISSIONS
223 225 PEAK LOAD
224 226 POWER PLANT OPERATION
225 227 RATED HEAT INPUT CAPACITY
226 228 REGENERATIVE CYCLE GAS TURBINE
227 229 RESIDUAL OIL
228 230 SIMPLE CYCLE GAS TURBINE

229 231 STATIONARY GAS TURBINE
232 STEADY STATE
230 233 SULFUR OXIDES (SOX)
231 234 THIRTY (30) DAY ROLLING AVERAGE
232 235 THREE (3) HOUR ROLLING AVERAGE
233 236 TOTAL DISSOLVED SOLIDS (TDS)
237 ULTRA LOW SULFUR DIESEL
234 238 UNCOMBINED WATER
239 WASTE DERIVED FUEL GAS
SECTION 300 – STANDARDS
301 LIMITATIONS - PARTICULATE MATTER
302 GOOD COMBUSTION PRACTICES FOR TURBINES
303 COOLING TOWERS
302 304 LIMITATIONS – OPACITY
303 305 LIMITATIONS - SULFUR IN FUEL
304 306 LIMITATIONS - NITROGEN OXIDES
305 307 LIMITATIONS - CARBON MONOXIDE
306 308 REQUIREMENTS FOR AIR POLLUTION CONTROL EQUIPMENT AND ECS
MONITORING EQUIPMENT
307 309 EMERGENCY FUEL USE NOTIFICATION
SECTION 400 – ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS (NOT APPLICABLE)
401 IN EXISTENCE AND IN COMPLIANCE
402 IN EXISTENCE AND NON-COMPLIANT
403 EMERGENCY STANDBY UNITS
SECTION 500 – MONITORING AND RECORDS
501 RECORDKEEPING AND REPORTING
502 RECORDS RETENTION
503 COMPLIANCE DETERMINATION
504 COMPLIANCE DETERMINATION-TEST METHODS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE
Adopted 7/02/03
Revised 10/17/07
Adopted 07/02/2003; Revised 10/17/2007; Revised xx/xx/xxxx
MARICOPA COUNTY
AIR POLLUTION CONTROL REGULATIONS
REGULATION III - CONTROL OF AIR CONTAMINANTS
RULE 322
POWER PLANT OPERATIONS

SECTION 100 - GENERAL
101 PURPOSE: To limit the discharge of nitrogen oxides, sulfur oxides, particulate matter and carbon
monoxide emissions into the atmosphere from stationary fossil-fuel-fired equipment at existing power
plants and existing cogeneration plants electric utility stationary gas turbines, electric utility steam
generating units or cogeneration steam generating units and to limit particulate matter emissions from
cooling towers associated with this equipment.
102 APPLICABILITY: This rule applies to any of the following types of equipment that burn fossil fuel: for
which construction commenced prior to May 10, 1996
102.1 Each electric utility steam generating unit or cogeneration steam generating unit used to generate
electric power that has a heat input of equal to or greater than 100 million (MM) Btu/hour (29
megawatts (MW)).
102.2 Each electric utility stationary gas turbine with a heat input at peak load equal to or greater than 10
MMBtu/hour (2.9 MW) based upon the lower heating value of the fuel.
102.3 Each cooling tower associated with the type of equipment listed in subsections 102.1 and
102.2 Sections 102.1 and 102.2 of this rule.
102.4 NSPS & NESHAP: In addition to this rule, facilities may be subject to New Source Performance
Standards (NSPS) in Rule 360 and/or National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants
(NESHAP) in Rule 370 of these rules.
103 EXEMPTIONS: This rule shall not apply to the following types of equipment:
103.1 Combustion equipment associated with nuclear power plant operations; or
103.2 Reciprocating internal combustion equipment.
104 PARTIAL EXEMPTIONS:
104.1 Stationary gas turbines that meet any of the following criteria listed below are exempt from
Sections 304 and 305 and subsections 301.1, 301.2, 306.4, and 501.4 of this rule:
a. Used for fire-fighting; or
b. Used for flood control; or
c. Used in the military at military training facilities or military gas turbines for use in other than
a garrison; or
d. Engaged by manufacturers in research and development of equipment for either gas turbine
emission control techniques or gas turbine efficiency improvements.
104.2 All equipment listed in Section 102 fired with an emergency normally fired with natural gas is
exempt from Sections 304 and 305 and subsections 301.1, 301.2, and 306.4, 501.4 of this rule.
104.3 All equipment listed in Section 102 shall be exempt from Sections 304 and 305 and subsections
301.1, 301.2, and 306.4 306.6, of this rule for 36 cumulative hrs. of firing emergency fuel per
year, per unit for testing, reliability, training, and maintenance purposes.
104.1 Stationary gas turbines that meet any of the criteria listed below are exempt from Sections 301.1,
301.2, 306, 307, 308.4 and 501.4 of this rule:
a. Used for fire-fighting
b. Used for flood control
c. Engaged by manufacturers in research and development of equipment for either gas
turbine emission control techniques or gas turbine efficiency improvements
104.2 Any equipment listed in Section 102 of this rule that is normally fired with natural gas, as allowed
by a permit issued by the Control Officer for that source, is exempt from Sections 301.1, 301.2,
306, 307, 308.4, 400 and 501.4 of this rule while firing emergency fuel.

104.3 Any equipment listed in Section 102 of this rule that only fires emergency fuel for 36 cumulative
hours per year or less, per unit for testing, reliability, training, and maintenance purposes as
allowed by a permit issued by the Control Officer for that source, is exempt from Sections 301.1,
301.2, 306, 307, 308.4, and 400 of this rule.
104.4 Any equipment listed in Section 102 of this rule that operates at or below 10 percent calendar year
annual capacity factor is exempt from Sections 306, 307, 308.4 and 400 of this rule.
SECTION 200 - DEFINITIONS: For the purpose of this rule, the following definitions shall apply: See Rule 100
(General Provisions and Definitions) of these rules for definitions of terms that are used but not specifically defined
in this rule. For the purpose of this rule, the following definitions shall apply, in addition to those definitions found
in Rule 100 (General Provisions and Definitions) of these rules. In the event of any inconsistency between any of the
Maricopa County air pollution control rules, the definitions in this rule take precedence.
201 ANNUAL CAPACITY FACTOR: The ratio between the actual heat input to a boiler or process heater
from the fuels burned during a calendar year and the potential heat input to the boiler or process heater had
it been operated for 8,760 hours during a year at the maximum steady state design heat input capacity or the
ratio between the actual electrical output of a machine or equipment during a calendar year and the
potential electrical output of a machine or equipment had it been operated for 8,760 hours during a year at
full nameplate capacity.
201 202 COGENERATION STEAM GENERATING UNIT: A steam or hot water generating unit that
simultaneously produces both electrical (or mechanical) and thermal energy (such as heat or steam) from
the same primary energy source and supplies more than one-third of its potential electric output to any
utility power distribution system for sale.
202 203 COMBINED CYCLE GAS TURBINE: A type of stationary gas turbine wherein heat from the turbine
exhaust is recovered by a steam generating unit to make steam for use in a steam-electric turbine.
203 204 CONTINUOUS EMISSION MONITORING SYSTEM (CEMS): The total equipment required to
sample and analyze emissions or process parameters such as opacity, nitrogen oxide, and oxygen or carbon
dioxide, and to provide a permanent data record.
204 205 COOLING TOWERS: Open water recirculating devices that use fans or natural draft to draw or force air
through the device to cool water by evaporation and direct contact.
205 206 CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN (CAP): A methodical procedure that is used to evaluate and correct a
turbine operational problem and that includes, at a minimum, improved preventative maintenance
procedures, improved ECS operating practices, possible operational changes, and progress reports.
206 207 DISTILLATE OIL: A petroleum fraction of fuel oil produced by distillation that complies with the
specifications for fuel oil numbers 1 or 2, as defined by the American Society for Testing and Materials in
ASTM D396-01, “Standard Specification for Fuel Oils.”
207 208 DRIFT: Water droplets, bubbles, and particulate matter that escape from cooling tower stacks.
208 209 DRIFT ELIMINATOR: Device used to remove drift from cooling tower exhaust air, thus reducing water
loss by relying on rapid changes in velocity and direction of air-droplet mixtures by impaction on
eliminator passage surfaces. A drift eliminator is not categorized as an emission control system but is an
inherent part of the cooling tower's design requirements.
209 210 DRIFT RATE: Percentage (%) of circulating water flow rate that passes through a drift eliminator on a
cooling tower.
210 211 ELECTRIC UTILITY STATIONARY GAS TURBINE: Any stationary gas turbine that is constructed
for the purpose of supplying more than 1/3 of its potential electric output capacity to any utility power
distribution system for sale. Both simple and combined cycle gas turbines are types of electric utility
stationary gas turbines.
211 212 ELECTRIC UTILITY STEAM GENERATING UNIT: Any steam electric generating unit that uses
fossil fuel and is constructed for the purpose of supplying more than one-third of its potential electric
output capacity and more than 25 MW electric output to any utility power distribution system for sale.

212 213 EMERGENCY FUEL: Fuel fired only during circumstances such as natural gas emergency, natural gas
curtailment, or breakdown of delivery system such as an unavoidable interruption of supply that makes it
impossible to fire natural gas in the unit. Fuel is not considered emergency fuel if it is used to avoid either
peak demand charges or high gas prices during on-peak price periods or due to a voluntary reduction in
natural gas usage by the power company.
214 EMERGENCY STANDBY UNIT: A stationary gas turbine that is limited by permit condition to be
operated only as a mechanical or electrical power source for a facility when the primary power source for a
facility has been rendered inoperable due to failure beyond the reasonable control of the operator, except
due to power interruption pursuant to an interruptible power supply agreement. Electricity generated by
such a unit cannot be sold.
213 215 EMISSION CONTROL SYSTEM (ECS): A system approved in writing by the Control Officer,
designed and operated in accordance with good engineering practice to reduce emissions.
214 216 FOSSIL FUEL: Naturally occurring carbonaceous substances from the ground such as natural gas,
petroleum, coal and any form of solid, liquid, or gaseous fuel derived from such material for the purpose of
creating energy.
215 217 FUEL SWITCHING STARTUP PROCESS: The act of changing from one type of fuel to a different
type of fuel.
216 218 HEAT INPUT: Heat derived from the combustion of fuel, not including the heat input from preheated
combustion air, recirculated flue gases, or exhaust gases from other sources, such as gas turbines, internal
combustion engines, and kilns.
217 219 HIGHER HEATING VALUE (HHV) OR GROSS HEATING VALUE: The amount of heat produced
by the complete combustion of a unit quantity of fuel determined by a calorimeter wherein the combustion
products are cooled to the temperature existing before combustion and all of the water vapor is condensed
to liquid.
218 LOW SULFUR OIL: Fuel oil containing less than or equal to 0.05% by weight of sulfur.
219 220 LOWER HEATING VALUE (LHV) OR NET HEATING VALUE: The amount of heat produced by
the complete combustion of a unit quantity of fuel determined by a calorimeter wherein the combustion
products are cooled to the temperature existing before combustion and all of the water vapor remains as
vapor and is not condensed to a liquid. The value is computed from the higher heating value by subtracting
the water originally present as moisture and the water formed by combustion of the fuel.
220 221 NATURAL GAS CURTAILMENT: An interruption in natural gas service, such that the daily fuel needs
of a combustion unit cannot be met with natural gas available due to one of the following reasons, beyond
the control of the owner or operator:
220.1 221.1 An unforeseeable failure or malfunction, not resulting from an intentional act or omission that the
governing state, federal or local agency finds to be due to an act of gross negligence on the part of
the owner or operator; or
220.2 221.2 A natural disaster; or
220.3 221.3 The natural gas is curtailed pursuant to governing state, federal or local agency rules or orders; or
220.4 221.4 The serving natural gas supplier provides notice to the owner or operator that, with forecasted
natural gas supplies and demands, natural gas service is expected to be curtailed pursuant to
governing state, federal or local agency rules or orders.
221 222 OPACITY: A condition of the ambient air, or any part thereof, in which an air contaminant partially or
wholly obscures the view of an observer.
223 OPERATING DAY: A 24-hour period between 0000 and 2359 during which any fuel is combusted at any
time in the unit. It is not necessary for fuel to be combusted continuously for the entire 24-hour period.
222 224 PARTICULATE MATTER EMISSIONS: Any and all particulate matter emitted to the ambient air as
measured by applicable state and federal test methods.

223 225 PEAK LOAD: 100% of the manufacturer’s design capacity of a gas turbine at 288° Kelvin, 60% relative
humidity, and 101.3 kilopascals pressure (ISO standard day conditions).
224 226 POWER PLANT OPERATION: An operation whose purpose is to supply more than one-third of its
potential electric output capacity to any utility power distribution system for sale.
225 227 RATED HEAT INPUT CAPACITY: The heat input capacity in million Btu/hr. as specified on the
nameplate of the combustion unit. If the combustion unit has been altered or modified such that its
maximum heat input is different than the heat input capacity on the name plate, the maximum heat input
shall be considered the rated heat input capacity.
226 228 REGENERATIVE CYCLE GAS TURBINE: Any stationary gas turbine that recovers thermal energy
from the exhaust gases and utilizes the thermal energy to preheat air prior to entering the combustion unit.
227 229 RESIDUAL OIL: The heavier oils that remain after the distillate oils and lighter hydrocarbons are distilled
off in refinery operations. This includes crude oil or fuel oil numbers 1 and 2 that have a nitrogen content
greater than 0.05 % by weight, and all fuel oil numbers 4, 5, and 6, as defined by the American Society of
Testing and Materials in ASTM D396-01, “Standard Specifications for Fuel Oils.”
228 230 SIMPLE CYCLE GAS TURBINE: Any stationary gas turbine that does not recover heat from the gas
turbine exhaust gases to preheat the inlet combustion air to the gas turbine, or that does not recover heat from
the gas turbine exhaust gases to heat water or generate steam.
229 231 STATIONARY GAS TURBINE: Any simple cycle gas turbine, regenerative gas turbine or any gas turbine
portion of a combined cycle gas turbine that is not self-propelled or that is attached to a foundation.
232 STEADY STATE: A safe, stable megawatt load at which a unit with equipment in normal operating
conditions is capable of being held for an extended period of time, without creating an unsafe or unstable
operating condition.
230 233 SULFUR OXIDES (SOx): The sum of the oxides of sulfur emitted from the flue gas from a combustion unit
that are directly dependent upon the amount of sulfur in the fuel used.
231 234 THIRTY (30) DAY ROLLING AVERAGE: An arithmetic mean or average of all hourly emission rates for
30 successive combustion equipment operating days and calculated by a CEMS every hour at the conclusion
of each day for the previous 30 operating days.
232 235 THREE (3) HOUR ROLLING AVERAGE: An arithmetic mean or average of the most recent three one
(1) hour tests, or an arithmetic mean or average over a period of three hours which is newly calculated with
each hourly measurement.
233 236 TOTAL DISSOLVED SOLIDS (TDS): The amount of concentrated matter reported in milligrams/liter
(mg/l) or parts per million (ppm) left after filtration of a well-mixed sample through a standard glass fiber
filter, as determined by an applicable method in the Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and
Wastewater, a conductivity/TDS meter, or ASTM D5907. The filtrate is evaporated to dryness in a weighed
dish and dried to constant weight at 180° C and the increase in dish weight represents the total dissolved
solids.
237 ULTRA LOW SULFUR DIESEL: Fuel oil containing less than or equal to 0.0015 % sulfur by weight.
234 238 UNCOMBINED WATER: Condensed water containing no more than analytical trace amounts of other
chemical elements or compounds.
239 WASTE DERIVED FUEL GAS: A gaseous fuel that is generated from the biodegradation of solid or liquid
waste including, but not limited to, digester gas and landfill gas.
SECTION 300 – STANDARDS
301 LIMITATIONS – PARTICULATE MATTER:
301.1 Fuel Type: An owner or operator of any combustion equipment listed in Section 102 shall burn
only natural gas except when firing emergency fuel per subsections Sections 104.2 and 104.3 of
this rule. An owner or operator may burn a fuel other than natural gas for non-emergency purposes
providing that the fuel shall not cause to be discharged more than 0.007 lbs. of particulate matter

per MMBtu during steady state operations, demonstrated and documented through performance
testing of this alternate fuel using Test Method 5. This usage of different fuels other than natural
gas shall be approved by the Control Officer prior to usage.
301.2 Particulate Matter Testing: A backhalf analysis shall be performed, using Reference Method 202
referenced in subsection Section 504.6 of this rule, each time a compliance test for particulate
matter emissions to meet the standard in subsection Section 301.1 of this rule is performed using
Test Method 5.
301.3 302 GOOD COMBUSTION PRACTICES FOR TURBINES: An During steady state operations, an owner
or operator of any stationary gas turbine listed in subsection 102.2 Section 102.2 of this rule, regardless of
fuel type, shall use operational practices recommended by the manufacturer and parametric monitoring to
ensure good combustion control as listed below. One of the following procedures may be used. For the
purposes of this rule, if a CEMS or another approved monitoring method is used, then the equipment would
be exempt from the requirements of Section 302 of this rule.
a. 302.1 Monitor the maximum temperature differential across the combustion burners or at locations
around the back end of the turbine, dependent upon the particular unit, to ensure no more than a
100°F difference using a thermocouple. Differential temperatures across the burners to
demonstrate good combustion practices shall be measured from at least one minute data point
during a complete steady state operating hour. If a valid maximum temperature differential of
greater than 100°F is observed across the burners, investigation and corrective action shall be
taken within three hours to reduce the temperature difference to 100°F or less; or
b. 302.2 If the manufacturer recommends that the maximum numerical temperature differential to ensure
good combustion is a temperature that is greater than 100°F, then proof of this maximum alternate
temperature shall be submitted to the Control Officer. The procedure to measure the maximum
temperature differential listed above in subsection 301.3a Section 302.1 of this rule shall then be
followed using this alternate recommended maximum temperature differential after approval by
the Control Officer.
c. 302.3 If the frequency of failure to meet the proper temperature differential of 100°F or to meet the
alternate temperature differential recommended by the manufacturer reflects a pattern that the
turbine is not being operated in a manner consistent with good combustion practices, then the
Control Officer may require the owner or operator to submit a Corrective Action Plan (CAP).
301.4 303 COOLING TOWERS: An owner or operator of a cooling tower associated with applicable units listed in
Section 102 of this rule shall:
a. 303.1 Equip the cooling tower with a drift eliminator. The drift eliminator shall not be manufactured out
of wood.
b. 303.2 The concentration of Total Dissolved Solids (TDS) multiplied by the percentage of drift rate shall
not exceed the maximum numerical limit of 20.
c. 303.3 Visually inspect the drift eliminator on a monthly basis only if the drift eliminator can be viewed
safely and does not require an owner or operator to walk into the tower. If the drift eliminator
cannot be safely inspected monthly then subsection 301.4d Section 303.4 of this rule shall apply:
d. 303.4 Visually inspect the drift eliminator for integrity during a regularly scheduled outage when the
cooling tower is not operating, if it cannot be inspected on a monthly basis. This visual inspection
shall be no less than once per year.
302 304 LIMITATIONS – OPACITY:
302.1 304.1 No person shall An owner or operator shall not discharge into the ambient air from any single
source of emissions any air contaminant, other than uncombined water, in excess of 20% opacity,
except as provided in subsection 302.2 Section 304.2 of this rule.
302.2 304.2 Opacity may exceed the applicable limits established in subsection 302.1 Section 304.1 of this rule
for up to one hour during the startup of switching fuels fuel switching startup process; however,
opacity shall not exceed 40% for any six (6) minute averaging period in this one hour period,

provided that the Control Officer finds that the owner or operator has, to the extent practicable,
maintained and operated the source of emissions in a manner consistent with good air pollution
control practices for minimizing emissions. The one hour period shall begin at the moment of
startup of fuel switching when the fuel switching startup process begins.
302.3 304.3 Determination of whether good air pollution control practices are being used shall be based on
information provided to the Control Officer upon request, which may include, but is not limited to,
the following:
a. Monitoring results.
b. Opacity observations.
c. Review of operating and maintenance procedures.
d. Inspection of the source.
303 305 LIMITATIONS - SULFUR IN FUEL: An owner or operator of any applicable equipment listed in
Section 102 of this rule that burns fuel oil alone or in combination with any other fuel as either emergency
fuel or non-emergency fuel that meets the standards in subsection 301.1 shall use only low sulfur oil ultra
low sulfur diesel. An owner or operator using waste derived fuel gas shall use only waste derived fuel gas
that contains no more than 0.08% sulfur by weight, alone or in combination with other fuels.
304 306 LIMITATIONS – NITROGEN OXIDES (NOx): No An owner or operator of any applicable equipment
listed in subsection 102.1 Section 102.1 and 102.2 of this rule that commenced construction or a major
modification after May 30, 1972 shall not cause to be discharged into the atmosphere nitrogen oxides in
excess of the following limits:
304.1 306.1 155 ppmv 42 ppmdv, calculated as nitrogen dioxide when burning gaseous fossil fuel. During steady
state operations, this test result using EPA Reference Method(s) 7 or other EPA-approved test
method designated by the Control Officer shall be based upon the arithmetic mean of the results of
three test runs. Each test run shall have a minimum sample time of one hour. If a Continuous
Emission Monitoring System (CEMS) is used for the compliance demonstration, the test
result compliance demonstration shall be based upon a 30-day rolling average. Any source for which
the owner or operator submits to the department a case-by-case reasonably available control
technology analysis that is or will be incorporated in a permit issued by the Control Officer for that
source, is exempt from Sections 306, 308.4, and 400 of this rule.
304.2 306.2 230 ppmv 65 ppmdv calculated as nitrogen dioxide when burning liquid fossil fuel. During steady
state operations, this test result using EPA Reference Method(s) 7 or other EPA-approved test
method designated by the Control Officer , shall be based upon the arithmetic mean of the results of
three test runs. Each test run shall have a minimum sample time of one hour. If a CEMS is used for
the compliance demonstration, the test result compliance demonstration shall be based upon a 30-day
rolling average. Any source for which the owner or operator submits to the department a case-by-
case reasonably available control technology analysis that is or will be incorporated in a permit
issued by the Control Officer for that source, is exempt from Sections 306, 308.4, and 400 of this
rule.
304.3 306.3 The nitrogen oxides concentration shall be measured dry and corrected to 3% oxygen for electric
utility steam generating units and cogeneration steam generating units. The nitrogen oxides
concentration shall be measured dry and corrected to 15% oxygen for stationary gas turbines and for
combined cycle gas turbines, during steady state operations.
305 307 LIMITATIONS - CARBON MONOXIDE: An owner or operator of any equipment listed in Section 102 of
this rule shall not cause to be discharged into the atmosphere carbon monoxide (CO) measured in excess of
400 ppmv at any time. This During steady state operations, this test result, using EPA Reference Method 10 or
other EPA-approved test method designated by the Control Officer and performed during steady state
compliance source testing, shall be based upon the arithmetic mean of the results of three test runs. Each test
run shall have a minimum sample time of one hour. The CO concentration shall be measured dry and
corrected to 3% oxygen for electric utility steam generating units and cogeneration steam generating units.

The CO concentration shall be measured dry and corrected to 15% oxygen for stationary gas turbines and for
combined cycle gas turbines, during steady state operations.
306 308 REQUIREMENTS FOR AIR POLLUTION CONTROL EQUIPMENT AND ECS MONITORING
EQUIPMENT:
306.1 308.1 Emission Control System Required: For affected operations which may exceed any of the applicable
standards set forth in Section 300 of this rule, an owner or operator may comply by installing and
operating an emission control system (ECS) or a combustion control system which reduces
emissions to below the applicable standards in Section 300 of this rule.
306.2 308.2 Providing and Maintaining ECS Monitoring Devices: No An owner or operator required to use an
approved ECS pursuant to this rule shall not do so without first properly installing, operating, and
maintaining in calibration and in good working order, devices for indicating temperatures, pressures,
transfer rates, rates of flow, or other operating conditions necessary to determine if air pollution
control equipment is functioning properly and is properly maintained as described in an approved
Operation and Maintenance (O&M) Plan.
306.3 308.3 Operation and Maintenance (O&M) Plan Required for ECS:
a. General Requirements: An owner or operator shall provide and maintain an O&M Plan for
any ECS, any other emission processing equipment, and any ECS monitoring devices that are
used pursuant to this rule or to an air pollution permit.
b. Approval by Control Officer: An owner or operator shall submit to the Control Officer for
approval the O&M Plans of each ECS and each ECS monitoring device that is used pursuant to
this rule.
c. Initial Plans: An owner or operator that who is required to have an O&M Plan pursuant to this
rule shall comply with all O&M Plans that the owner or operator has submitted for approval, but
which have not yet been approved, unless notified by the Control Officer in writing. Once the
initial plan has been approved in writing by the Control Officer, an owner or operator shall then
comply with the approved plan.
d. Revisions to Plan: If revisions to the initial plan have been approved by the Control Officer in
writing, an owner or operator shall comply with the revisions to the initial plan. If revisions to
the plan have not yet been approved by the Control Officer, then an An owner or operator shall
comply with the newest recent may revise an initial O&M plan by submitting written revisions
to the Control Officer on file at Maricopa County Air Quality Department. The owner or
operator shall at all times comply with the latest version of the O&M Plan submitted to the
Control Officer.
e. Control Officer Modifications to Plan: After discussion with the owner or operator, the
Control Officer may modify the plan in writing prior to approval of the initial O&M plan. An
owner or operator shall then comply with the plan that has been modified by the Control Officer.
306.4 308.4 Continuous Emission Monitoring Systems (CEMS) Emission Compliance Demonstration:
a. An owner or operator of a combustion unit an electric utility stationary gas turbine, electric
utility steam generating unit or cogeneration steam generating unit used to generate electric
power subject to Section 304 306 of this rule with a heat input of greater than 250 MMBtu/hr,
regardless of fuel type, shall install, calibrate, maintain, and operate a CEMS or conduct stack
tests as approved by the Control Officer for measuring nitrogen oxides. and recording the output
of the system. Where nitrogen oxide emissions are monitored by a CEMS, then a CEMS shall
also be required for the measurement of the oxygen content of the flue gases. All CEMS shall
comply with the provisions in 40 CFR Subpart Da, Part 60, 60.47 (a) 40 CFR Part 60.
b. An owner or operator of any affected unit electric utility stationary gas turbine, electric utility
steam generating unit or cogeneration steam generating unit used to generate electric
power listed above that requires a CEMS for nitrogen oxides that meets and is continuing to
meet the requirements of 40 CFR Part 75 or Part 60 may use that CEMS to meet the
requirements of subsection 306.4 a Section 308.4(a) of this rule.

307 309 EMERGENCY FUEL USE NOTIFICATION: An owner or operator of a unit an electric utility stationary
gas turbine, electric utility steam generating unit or cogeneration steam generating unit used to generate
electric power that is fired with emergency fuel but is normally fired with natural gas shall notify the Control
Officer verbally no later than 24 hours after declaration of the emergency that necessitates its use in
compliance with subsections 104.2 and 212 Section 104.2 of this rule. This verbal report shall be followed by
a written report within 48 hours of initial emergency fuel usage. The written report shall also include
identification of the nature of the emergency, initial dates of usage, and the expected dates of usage.
SECTION 400 - ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS (NOT APPLICABLE)
401 IN EXISTENCE AND IN COMPLIANCE: Except as set forth in Section 104.4 of this rule and the case-
by-case RACT analysis of Section 306.1 of this rule, the owner or operator of any electric utility stationary
gas turbine, electric utility steam generating unit or cogeneration steam generating unit used to generate
electric power in existence on [date of rule adoption] and subject to the emission limits in Section 306 of
this rule shall submit a Notification of Compliance within 6 months of becoming subject to Section 306 of
this rule. This Notification shall indicate how compliance with the NOx limit has been determined and if
performance testing is required to demonstrate compliance. If performance testing is required to
demonstrate compliance, the Notification shall include a timeline for the test. Performance test results from
a past test may be used for this determination, as long as the test was conducted within 5 years before [date
of rule adoption]. If compliance under Section 401 of this rule cannot be demonstrated, an owner or
operator of any electric utility stationary gas turbine, electric utility steam generating unit or cogeneration
steam generation unit used to generate electric power shall comply with Section 402 of this rule.
402 IN EXISTENCE AND NON-COMPLIANT:
402.1 Except as set forth in Section 104.4 of this rule and the case-by-case RACT analysis of Section
306.1 of this rule, when air pollution control equipment is required to achieve the emission limits
in Section 306 of this rule, the owner or operator shall comply with the increments of progress in
Section 402.2 of this rule and be in compliance with the emission limits by the date specified in
Section 402.2 of this rule.
402.2 Increments of Progress: The owner or operator of any electric utility stationary gas turbine,
electric utility steam generating unit or cogeneration steam generating unit used to generate
electric power subject to the emission limits in Section 306 of this rule shall comply with the
following increments of progress. The Control Officer, upon the request of the owner or operator,
may extend the increments of progress. The following compliance schedule does not apply to units
already compliant with this rule as of [date of rule adoption]:
a. Within 18 months of becoming subject to the emission limits in Section 306 of this rule,
submit a compliance schedule and permit application to the Control Officer.
b. Within 36 months of final permit issuance, be fully compliant with the emission limits in
Section 306 of this rule and submit to the Control Officer a complete source test report
indicating compliance.
402.3 Removal From Service: The owner or operator of any electric utility stationary gas turbine,
electric utility steam generating unit or cogeneration steam generating unit used to generate
electric power in existence on [date of rule adoption] that is expected to be removed from service
within 24 months of becoming subject to Section 306 of this rule shall be exempt from the
emission limits in Section 306 of this rule if it complies with the following:
a. Within 6 months of becoming subject to the limits in Section 306 of this rule, submit to the
Control Officer a notification of proposed removal from service.
b. Within 14 months of submitting notification under Section 402.3(a) of this rule, submit to the
Control Officer a decommissioning plan and a permit revision providing that the units will be
decommissioned by a certain date.
c. Within 4 months of decommissioning plan and permit revision approval, discontinue
operation of the electric utility stationary gas turbine, electric utility steam generating unit or
cogeneration steam generating unit used to generate electric power, disconnect the fuel supply

line(s), and notify the Control Officer in writing of the removal from service. Operation of
any electric utility stationary gas turbine, electric utility steam generating unit or cogeneration
steam generating unit used to generate electric power beyond 4 months of decommissioning
plan and permit revision approval, shall be conducted in compliance with the emission limits
in Section 306 of this rule.
403 EMERGENCY STANDBY UNITS: The owner or operator of any emergency standby unit in existence
prior to [date of rule adoption] shall, [date 2 months of rule adoption], submit to the Control Officer a
notification requesting an exemption from the requirements of Section 300 of this rule.
SECTION 500 - MONITORING AND RECORDS
501 RECORDKEEPING AND REPORTING: Any owner or operator subject to this rule shall comply with
the requirements set forth in this section. Any records and data required by this section shall be kept on site
at all times in a consistent and complete manner and be made available without delay to the Control Officer
or his designee upon request. Records shall consist of the following information:
501.1 Equipment Listed In Section 102 of this Rule: Type of fuel used, amount of fuel used, amount of
sulfur in the fuel if using liquid fuel, and the days and hours of operation.
501.2 Cooling Towers: Monthly gravimetric testing reports for TDS shall be recorded for six months in
succession and thereafter quarterly reports shall be recorded. Results of the monthly or yearly visual
inspection of the drift eliminator shall also be recorded. If the drift eliminator cannot be visually
inspected monthly, then documentation of the physical configuration of the drift eliminator shall be
submitted to the Control Officer to demonstrate that the drift eliminator cannot be inspected monthly.
501.3 Emergency Fuel Usage: Type and amount of emergency fuel used, dates and hours of operation
using emergency fuel, nature of the emergency or reason for the use of emergency fuel as stated
in subsections 104.2 and 104.3 Sections 104.2 and 104.3 of this rule.
501.4 Fuel Switching: Monthly records of fuel switching including stop and start times, monthly records
of hours of operation for testing, reliability and maintenance purposes per subsection 104.3 Section
104.3 of this rule, and a yearly log total of these hours.
501.5 CEMS Continuous Emission Monitoring Systems: All CEMS measurements, results of CEMS
performance evaluations, CEMS calibration checks, and adjustments and maintenance performed on
these systems.
501.6 Good Combustion Practices: Measurements of the temperature differential across the burners of
turbines per subsection 301. 3 a, b, or c Section 302 of this rule, results of evaluation and of
corrective action taken to reduce the temperature differential or a finding that the temperature
differential returned to the range listed in subsection 301.3 a or b Sections 302.1 or 302.2 of this rule
without any action by the owner or operator. For the purposes of this rule, if a CEMS or other
approved monitoring method is used, then the equipment would be exempt from the requirements of
Section 302 of this rule.
501.7 Equipment Referenced In Sections 104.4, 306.1, And 306.2: Maintain records of the annual
capacity factor and NOx emissions to demonstrate compliance with Sections 104.4, 306.1, or 306.2
of this rule, as applicable.
502 RECORDS RETENTION: Copies of reports, logs, and supporting documentation required by the Control
Officer shall be retained for at least 5 years. Records and information required by this rule shall also be
retained for at least 5 years.
503 COMPLIANCE DETERMINATION:
503.1 Low Sulfur Oil Ultra Low Sulfur Diesel Verification: If the Control Officer requests
documentation of the sulfur content of the fuel oil to demonstrate the 0.0015% limits, the owner or
operator shall submit one of the following:
a. Fuel receipts, or
b. Contract specifications, or

c. Pipeline meter tickets, or
d. Fuel supplier information, or
e. Purchase records, or
f. Testing of the fuel oil for sulfur content
The items listed above must provide accurate sulfur content values or be based on enforceable test
methods as approved by the Administrator to determine the sulfur content.
a. An owner or operator shall submit fuel oil or liquid fuel receipts from the fuel supplier
indicating the sulfur content of the fuel or verification that the oil used to generate electric
power meets the 0.05% sulfur limit if requested by the Control Officer; or
b. If fuel receipts are not available then an owner or operator shall submit a statement of
certification or proof of the sulfur content of the oil or liquid fuel from the supplier to the
Control Officer; or
c. An owner or operator may elect to test the fuel for sulfur content in lieu of certification from
the fuel supplier or fuel receipts using one of the test methods listed in subsections 504.11,
504.12, 504.13 or 504.14.
503.2 Drift Rate Verification: An owner or operator shall submit design drift rate verification from the
manufacturer of the drift eliminator used in the cooling towers to the Control Officer if proof of
the design drift rate is requested by the Control Officer.
503.3 Waste Derived Fuel Gas – Sulfur Verification: The owner or operator shall submit
documentation of the concentration of the sulfur level of the waste derived fuel gas to the Control
Officer upon request. The sulfur content of gaseous fuels shall be determined by South Coast Air
Quality Management District Method 307-94 Determination of Sulfur in a Gaseous Matrix.
504 COMPLIANCE DETERMINATION-TEST METHODS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE: The
following test methods are approved for use for the purpose of determining compliance with this rule. The
test methods The EPA test methods as they exist in the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) (July 1, 2004),
as listed below, are incorporated by reference in Appendix G of the Maricopa County Air Pollution Control
Regulations. Alternative test methods as approved by the Administrator or other EPA-approved test
methods may be used upon prior written approval from the Control Officer. When more than one test
method is permitted for the same determination, an exceedance under any method will constitute a
violation. Copies of test methods referenced in this section are available at the Maricopa County Air
Quality Department, 1001 N. Central Avenue, Suite 595125, Phoenix, AZ 85004-1942. The Standard
Methods listed below (1995) are also incorporated by reference. When more than one test method as listed
in subsections 504.11 through 504.14 is permitted for the same determination, an exceedance of the limits
established in this rule determined by any of the applicable test methods constitutes a violation.
504.1 EPA Reference Methods 1 (“Sample and Velocity Traverses for Stationary Sources”), and 1A
(“Sample and Velocity Traverses for Stationary Sources with Small Stacks and Ducts”) (40 CFR
60, Appendix A).
504.2 EPA Reference Methods 2 (“Determination of Stack Gas Velocity and Volumetric Flow Rate”),
2A (“Direct Measurement of Gas Volume Through Pipes and Small Ducts”), 2C (“Determination
of Stack Gas Velocity and Volumetric Flow Rate in Small Stacks or Ducts”), and 2D
(“Measurement of Gas Volumetric Flow Rates in Small Pipes and Ducts”) (40 CFR 60, Appendix
A).
504.3 EPA Reference Methods 3 (“Gas Analysis for the Determination of Dry Molecular Weight”), 3A
(“Determination of Oxygen and Carbon Dioxide Concentrations in Emissions From Stationary
Sources (Instrumental Analyzer Procedure)”), 3B (“Gas Analysis for the Determination of
Emission Rate Correction Factor of Excess Air”), and 3C (“Determination of Carbon Dioxide,
Methane, Nitrogen and Oxygen from Stationary Sources”) (40 CFR 60, Appendix A).
504.4 EPA Reference Method 4 (“Determination of Moisture Content in Stack Gases”) (40 CFR 60,
Appendix A).

504.5 EPA Reference Method 5 (“Determination of Particulate Emissions from Stationary Sources”) (40
CFR 60, Appendix A).
504.6 EPA Reference Method 202 (“Determination of Condensable Particulate Emissions from
Stationary Sources”) (40 CFR 51, Appendix M).
504.7 EPA Reference Methods 7 (“Determination of Nitrogen Oxide Emissions from Stationary
Sources”), 7A (“Determination of Nitrogen Oxide Emissions from Stationary Sources”), 7B
(“Determination of Nitrogen Oxide Emissions from Stationary Sources - Ultraviolet
Spectrometry”), 7C (“Determination of Nitrogen Oxide Emissions from Stationary Sources -
Alkaline-Permanganate Colorimetric Method”), 7D (“Determination of Nitrogen Oxide Emissions
from Stationary Sources – Alkaline-Permanganate Chromatographic Method”), and 7E
(“Determination of Nitrogen Oxide Emissions from Stationary Sources – Instrumental Analyzer
Method”) (40 CFR 60, Appendix A).
504.8 EPA Reference Method 9 (“Visual Determination of the Opacity of Emissions from Stationary
Sources”) (40 CFR 60, Appendix A).
504.9 EPA Reference Method 10 (“Determination of Carbon Monoxide Emissions from Stationary
Sources”) (40 CFR 60, Appendix A).
504.10 EPA Reference Method 20 (“Determination of Nitrogen Oxides, Sulfur Dioxide and Diluent
Emissions from Stationary Gas Turbines”) (40 CFR 60, Appendix A).
504.11 American Society of Testing Materials, ASTM Method D2622-9816, (“Standard Test Method for
Sulfur in Petroleum Products by Wavelength Disperse X-Ray Fluorescence Spectrometry”), 1998.
504.12 American Society of Testing Materials, ASTM Method D1266-98, (“Standard Test Method for
Sulfur in Petroleum Products - Lamp Method”), 1998.
504.13 504.12 American Society of Testing Materials, ASTM Method D2880-0015, (“Standard Specification for
Gas Turbine Fuel Oils”), 2000.
504.14 504.13 American Society of Testing Materials, ASTM Method D4294-90 or 9816e1, (“Standard Test
Method for Sulfur in Petroleum Products by Energy-Dispersive X-Ray Fluorescence
Spectrometry”), 1990 or 1998.
504.15 504.14 Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater,(“Dissolved Solids Dried at
180ºC, Method #2540C”), American Public Health Association, 19th edition, 1995.
504.15 ASTM D5907-13, Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater for Filterable
Matter (Total Dissolved Solids) and Nonfilterable Matter (Total Suspended Solids) in Water.
504.16 South Coast Air Quality Management District Method 307-94 Determination of Sulfur in a
Gaseous Matrix.

Return to list of attachments
MARICOPA COUNTY BOARD OF HEALTH MEETING MINUTES
Monday, April 25, 2016
301 W. Jefferson Street, 10th Floor
Phoenix, Arizona 85003
Board of Supervisors Conference Room
President Kip Steill called the meeting to order at 3:09 p.m.
ROLL CALL:
Members Present: Members Excused:
Don Cassano Scott Somers
Nedra Halley Francisca Montoya
Andrew Kunasek
Debra Baldauff
Kip Steill
Don Hughes
Robert MacMillan
Michael Mills, M.D. (via phone)
Ex-Officio: Bob England, M.D.
CALL TO THE PUBLIC:
Mr. Kip Steill announced it was time for a call to the public and requested public comment forms
for those who wanted to speak or who wanted to address any action items.
Supervisor Kunasek introduced the newest Board of Health member, Mr. MacMillan.
DISCUSSION/ACTION ITEMS
1. Election of Board of Health Vice President:
Mr. Don Hughes was nominated as Vice President of the Board of Health. A motion was made by
Mr. Don Cassano and seconded by Ms. Nedra Halley and all were in favor. The motion passed
unanimously.
2. Approval of Minutes: President Steill asked for a motion to approve the minutes from the BOH
Meeting held on January 25, 2016. Motion was made by Ms. Nedra Halley to approve the BOH
minutes as presented. Motion was seconded by Mr. Don Cassano and the motion passed
unanimously.
3. Approval of Public Health FY 17 OMB Budget Recommendation Mr. Scot Pitcairn
The Board of Health Finance Committee recommended that the Board of Health approve Public
Health’s FY 17 OMB Budget Recommendation. Mr. Pitcairn was available to answer any questions
that the Board of Health had. Motion was made by Mr. Don Hughes to approve Public Health’s FY
17 OMB budget recommendation. Motion was seconded by Mr. Don Cassano and the motion
passed unanimously.
4. Approval of Environmental Services FY 17 OMB Budget Recommendation Ms. Diane Cabanillas
The Board of Health Finance Committee recommended that the Board of Health approve
Environmental Services’ FY 17 OMB Budget Recommendation. Ms. Cabanillas was available to
answer any questions that the Board of Health had. Motion was made by Mr. Don Hughes to

approve Environmental Services FY 17 OMB budget recommendation. Motion was seconded by Mr.
Halley and the motion passed unanimously.
5. Approval of the initiation of regulatory change for the ozone-related Mr. Philip A. McNeely
rulemakings
The rules being revised regarding ozone are the following:
Rule 241: Minor New Source Review
Rule 322: Power Plant Operations
Rule 323: Fuel Burning Equipment from Industrial/Commercial/Institutional Sources
Rule 324: Stationary Internal Combustion (IC) Engines
Rule 336: Surface Coating Operations
Rule 342: Coating Wood Furniture and Fixtures
Rule 350: Storage of Organic Liquids at Bulk Plants and Terminals
Rule 351: Loading of Organic Liquids
Rule 352: Gasoline Delivery Vessel Testing and Use
Rule 353: Gasoline In Stationary Dispensing Tanks
These rules are being closed for public comment and will be published May 13th. If there is no
further comment, the rules will go to the Board of Supervisors for a hearing. These rules are in
regards to non-attainment for the ozone standards. These rules are due to the EPA January 1, 2017
and have gone through the EROP/stakeholder meeting process. Every facility that has a permit will
receive information when rule changes are occurring via email. For more information on the
regulatory process: http://www.maricopa.gov/regulations/default.aspx
Motion was made by Mr. Don Cassano to approve the initiation of regulatory change for the
ozone-related rulemakings. Motion was seconded by Ms. Nedra Halley and the motion passed
unanimously.
6. Fee Waiver Applications Mr. Ken Conklin
Mr. Ken Conklin presented thirty-two (32) fee waivers for review and consideration of approval. A
summary sheet document was provided.
Motion to approve the 32 Fee Waiver applications was made by Ms. Nedra Halley, seconded by
Mr. Don Cassano and all were in favor. Motion passed unanimously.
Discussion Items:
1. Public Health Report: Dr. Bob England
i. Human Resources
ii. Communication
iii. Infrastructure
iv. Strategic Planning
v. Programs
vi. Disease Update
vii. Future Topics
Dr. Bob provided the Board of Health with the updated Public Health org chart. The re-org has
aligned MCDPH into programmatic divisions. Previously, MCDPH was organized by funding stream.
Dr. Bob briefed the board on funding cuts that the department is receiving, including a $300,000
cut to WIC and $230,000 cut to the Office of Preparedness and Response (CDC is pulling some
money back for the Zika response). WIC is struggling to meet a target number of clients but each
time the program doesn’t meet the target, the number of target clients and funding is decreased.
The reason for difficulties with reaching the target number of client is that client encounter has

become increasingly more complex. The Office of Vital Records is moving their St. Mary’s Food
Bank location to a location near the 1-17 and Dunlap. MCDPH is no longer tracking returning
travelers from ebola stricken countries. Arizona has experienced the highest level of severity in the
country for flu for hospitalization and death rates. CDC is gathering data but there may not be
enough lab evidence to determine a cause. Zika virus is another of the flaviviruses that is associated
with significant neurological defects in infants whose mothers were infected with the virus in the
first two trimesters of pregnancy. The primary vector is Aedes Aegypti mosquitos. In Maricopa
County, there is no endemic spread of zika; only one travel associated case. The strategy when
there is a travel associated case is to have the individual stay inside, wear repellant, and when
necessary, have Environmental Services do traps and remediation depending on consent. There is
concern regarding the process and timeline it would take to enter private property if necessary to
spray for this type of mosquito. The Surgeon General will be visiting Arizona in May to do a tour on
opioid use. The NACCHO Annual meeting will be July 19 – 21 in Phoenix.
ANNOUNCEMENTS AND CURRENT EVENTS
 Next meeting is July 25, 2016
ADJOURNMENT: There being no further business, motion to adjourn the meeting was made by Mr.
Don Cassano, seconded by Ms. Halley and motion was passed unanimously. The meeting was
adjourned at 4:27 p.m.

Copies of all written and electronic Stakeholder input
Return to list of attachments
Michelle Mada - AQDX
From: Hether Krause - AQDX
Sent: Monday, June 06, 2016 8:11 AM
To: Johanna Kuspert - AQDX
Subject: Fwd: Regulatory Outreach
Sent from my iPhone
Begin forwarded message:
From: Jennifer Pokorski - FCDX <jmp@mail.maricopa.gov>
Date: June 6, 2016 at 7:44:46 AM MST
To: Hether Krause - AQDX <HetherKrause@mail.maricopa.gov>
Cc: Lynne Hilliard - MCDOTX <lynnehilliard@mail.maricopa.gov>
Subject: FW: Regulatory Outreach
From: Regulatory [mailto:regulations@mail.maricopa.gov]
Sent: Saturday, June 04, 2016 1:51 PM
To: Hether Krause - ENVX; Valerie Beckett - PLANDEVX; Jennifer Pokorski - FCDX
Subject: FW: Regulatory Outreach
-------------------------------------------
From: michael.denby@aps.com[SMTP:MICHAEL.DENBY@APS.COM]
Sent: Saturday, June 04, 2016 1:50:57 PM
To: Regulatory
Subject: Regulatory Outreach
Auto forwarded by a Rule
Citizen Comments
Issue: AQ-2015-002 Rule 322 Power Plant Operations
Citizen's Name: michael denby
Organization: APS
City: Phoenix
Zip: 85004
Phone Number: 6022502870
Phone Type:
Email: michael.denby@aps.com
Does citizen want to be contacted:
Comment is regarding: express support
Comments:
APS has submitted comments on both Rule 322 and Rule 323 in one document. Those comments were

submitted as an email attachment after clicking the hyperlink below. Please let me know if you did not
receive the attached document. Sincerely, Michael Denby, APS
Time of Request: 6/4/2016 1:50:57 PM

Michael Denby PO Box 53999 Telephone: 602-250-2870
Environmental Policy & Programs Mail Station 9303 Fax: 602-250-3005
Phoenix, AZ 85072-3999 e-mail: Michael.denby@aps.com
June 4, 2016 Electronically submitted
Philip McNeely, Director
Maricopa County Air Quality Department
1001 N. Central Avenue
Phoenix, AZ 85004
Re: Arizona Public Service Company Comments on Notice of Proposed Rulemaking,
Maricopa County Air Pollution Control Regulations, Rule 322- Power Plant
Operations and Rule 323 Fuel Burning Equipment from
industrial/Commercial/Institutional (ICI) Sources
Dear Director McNeely:
The Arizona Public Service Company (“APS”) appreciates the opportunity to submit
comments on the Maricopa County Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, Rule 322- Power Plant
Operations, and Rule 323 Fuel Burning Equipment from Industrial/Commercial/Institutional
(ICI) Sources (“Proposed Rules”).
As one of the Southwest’s largest electric utilities, APS operates a fleet of power
generating facilities to serve the needs of over one million customers in 11 of Arizona’s 15
counties. The APS fleet includes two coal-fired power plants, six natural gas-fired power plants,
and the nation’s largest nuclear power plant, the Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Station. APS is
a leader in renewable energy with over 1.2 gigawatts of renewable energy. Additionally, 47% of
the electricity we provide comes from carbon-free resources. APS owns and operates three fossil
fuel fired power plants within Maricopa County which will be directly impacted by the Proposed
Rulemakings. Accordingly, APS has a significant interest in the Proposed Rulemakings and
through these comments hopes to help the County draft better more workable rules.

APS would like to thank the Maricopa County Air Quality Department rule development
team for its community outreach and stakeholder workshops related to all the rulemakings
triggered by the recent reclassification of Maricopa County from marginal to moderate non-
attainment for ozone. This has been a complex process with many different stakeholders and
some rigid deadlines. APS very much appreciates the County personnel who have worked
tirelessly to make the process as inclusive and informative as possible. To that end, APS feels
that Rule 322 and 323 are well drafted proposed rules. In the interests of improving the
functionality and applicability of the proposed rules, APS offers the following comments.
RULE 322 Power Plant Operations
I. Index
In the index of the Proposed Rule there appear to be two sections that are not consistent with
the text of the rule. The following changes would help align both.
The amended rule language would look as follows:
307 REQUIREMENTS FOR AIR POLLUTION CONTROL EQUIPMENT AND ECS
MONITORING EQUIPMENT
504 COMPLIANCE DETERMINATIONS - TEST METHODS INCORPORATED BY
REFERENCE
II. Section 104.4 Partial Exemptions
For units that operate at a low capacity factor (10% or less), the County has proposed a de
minimis partial exemption. This partial exemption makes sense and works for several APS units
that operate at low levels. However, between the final stakeholder workshop and the Proposed
Rulemaking, the County added a counterintuitive requirement that an exempt unit would
somehow need to operate under a specific permit limit. Upon reflection, we hope that the
County can see the troubles caused by this position. The purpose of Section 104.4 is to provide a
partial exemption from the requirements of Sections 305, 306, 307.4 and 400 for units that
operate at a low capacity factor. If the 10% is linked to an actual permit limit, then it would be
the equivalent of a case-by-case determination under 305.1 defeating the very purpose of this de
minimis exemption. Any unit operating under a Section 104.4 partial exemption is still required
to keep records. If the unit exceeds the 10% threshold, this exemption no longer applies. At that
time the unit would then no longer be excluded from Section 305 and would need to meet RACT
through installation of control equipment or seek a case-by-case determination under Section
305.1 which would result in a permit limit. Accordingly, limiting this de minimis exemption by
requiring a permit limit defeats the purpose of the partial exemption.

To resolve this issue, APS recommends that the County remove the phrase “and that is
or will be incorporated in a permit issued by the Control Officer for that source” from the
sentence.
Additionally, in order for Section 104.4 to work as intended, it is necessary to add
Section 400 to the list of sections from which the unit is partially exempt. Since a unit operating
at less than 10% would be exempt from RACT compliance, this partial exemption needs to
exempt the unit from the requirements of Section 400. Once a unit exceeds the 10% threshold, it
would need to meet the requirements of Section 400, but not until then.
To resolve this issue, APS recommends that the County add “and 400” to the sentence.
The amended rule language would look as follows:
104.4 Any equipment listed in Section 102 of this rule that operates less than or equal to 10
percent annual capacity factor per calendar year and that is or will be incorporated in a permit
issued by the Control Officer for that source, is exempt from Sections 305, 306, and 307.4, and
400 of this rule.
III. Section 200 Definitions
a. Section 201 Annual Capacity Factor:
The original definition was lacking a relationship to gas turbines. We suggest the
following change to allow it to apply to steam units as well as gas turbines.
The amended rule language would look as follows:
201 ANNUAL CAPACITY FACTOR: The ratio between the actual heat input to a boiler
or process heater from the fuels burned during a calendar year and the potential heat input to the
boiler or process heater had it been operated for 8,760 hours during a year at the maximum
steady state design heat input capacity. or the ratio between the actual electrical output of a
machine or equipment during a calendar year and the potential electrical output of a machine or
equipment had it been operated for 8, 760 hours at full nameplate capacity.
b. Section 237 Thirty (30) Day Rolling Average
The 30 day rolling average equation can be deceptively complex. To help make the
definition as clear as possible, we suggest the following changes.
The amended rule language would look as follows:
237 THIRTY (30) DAY ROLLING AVERAGE: An arithmetic mean or average of all
hourly emission rates for 30 successive combustion equipment operating days and calculated by
a CEMS at the conclusion of each day for the previous 30 operating days every hour.

IV. Section 303 Limitations – Opacity
Section 303.2 appears to be related to the issue of fuel switching. The change proposed
by the County seems to confuse the matter by inserting “or” into the sentence in place of “of”. It
would appear that “of” was the correct choice and should not have been changed. To make it
clearer, we would suggest changing “switching fuel” to “fuel switching”, which lines up better
with the final sentence in that section which also uses “fuel switching.”
The amended rule language would look as follows:
303.2 Opacity may exceed the applicable limits established in Section 303.1 of this rule
for up to one hour during the startup or of fuel switching fuels; however, opacity shall not exceed
40% for any six (6) minute averaging period in this one hour period, provided that the Control
Officer finds that the owner or operator has, to the extent practicable, maintained and operated
the source of emissions in a manner consistent with good air pollution control practices for
minimizing emissions. The one hour period shall begin at the moment of startup of fuel
switching.
V. Section 305 Limitations- Nitrogen Oxides (NOx)
As part of the RACT assessment a unit may choose to use a case-by-case RACT analysis.
The County has made provision for the case-by-case RACT analysis within Sections 305.1 and
305.2. Because the case-by-case RACT analysis is separate from the emission limit in Section
305.1 and 305.2, the County correctly sought to exempt the case-by-case RACT analysis from
these sections. However, it is important that the County also exempt the case-by-case RACT
analysis from the requirements of Section 400 (parts 401 and 402) since it will conflict with the
specific permit limit set forth by the case-by-case analysis.
Accordingly, we recommend that the County insert “Section 400” into the exemptions
listed in Section 305.1 and Section 305.2.
The amended rule language would look as follows:
305 LIMITATIONS – NITROGEN OXIDES (NOx): An owner or operator of any
applicable equipment listed in Section 102.1 and 102.2 of this rule shall not cause to be
discharged into the atmosphere nitrogen oxides in excess of the following limits:
305.1 42 ppmdv, calculated as nitrogen dioxide when burning gaseous fossil fuel. During
steady state operations, this test result using EPA Reference Method(s) 7 or other EPA-approved
test method designated by the Control Officer shall be based upon the arithmetic mean of the
results of three test runs. Each test run shall have a minimum sample time of one hour. If CEMS
is used for the compliance demonstration, the compliance demonstration shall be based upon a
30-day rolling average. Any source for which the owner or operator submits to the department a
case-by-case reasonably available control technology analysis that is or will be incorporated in a
permit issued by the Control Officer for that source, is exempt from Sections 305, and 307.4 and
400 of this rule.
305.2 65 ppmdv calculated as nitrogen dioxide when burning liquid fossil fuel. During steady
state operations, this test result using EPA Reference Method(s) 7 or other EPA-approved test

method designated by the Control Officer , shall be based upon the arithmetic mean of the results
of three test runs. Each test run shall have a minimum sample time of one hour. If a CEMS is
used for the compliance demonstration, the compliance demonstration shall be based upon a 30-
day rolling average. Any source for which the owner or operator submits to the department a
case-by-case reasonably available control technology analysis that is or will be incorporated in a
permit issued by the Control Officer for that source, is exempt from Sections 305, and 307.4 and
400 of this rule.
VI. Section 306 Limitations - Carbon Monoxide:
The County appears to have misplaced some clarifying language that was offered during
the final workshop. In Section 306, the County incorrectly placed combined cycle gas turbines
in the 3% oxygen correction factor section. The correct location of combined cycle gas turbines
is within the 15% oxygen correction factor section, not the 3% section. This change also lines up
Sections 305.3 and 306 to have consistent factors.
The amended rule language would look as follows:
306 LIMITATIONS - CARBON MONOXIDE: An owner or operator of any
equipment listed in Section 102 of this rule shall not cause to be discharged into the atmosphere
carbon monoxide (CO) measured in excess of 400 ppmv at any time. This During steady state
operations, this test result, using EPA Reference Method 10 or other EPA-approved test method
designated by the Control Officer and performed during steady state compliance source testing,
shall be based upon the arithmetic mean of the results of three test runs. Each test run shall have
a minimum sample time of one hour. The CO concentration shall be measured dry and corrected
to 3% oxygen for electric utility steam generating units, and cogeneration steam generating units,
and combined cycle gas turbines. The CO concentration shall be measured dry and corrected to
15% oxygen for stationary gas turbines and combined cycle gas turbines during steady state
operations.
VII. SECTION 400 - ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS
a. Section 401
Section 400 is the operative section that helps define how the RACT standard will be
implemented by the affected units. There are several disconnects and inconsistencies that should
be addressed to make this section work as intended.
First - it is important to make sure that partially exempt units are not pulled into Section
400. For example, Section 104.4 is a partial exemption as long as the unit maintains a capacity
factor of 10% or less, and should not be required to comply with Section 400. In fact, it would
be inconsistent, if not impossible, to do both.
Second- it is important that any unit which chooses to undertake a case-by-case RACT
analysis under Section 305.1 not be required to also comply with Section 400. That analysis is
outside the scope Section 400. Accordingly, a case-by-case RACT analysis under Section 305.1
should be exempt from Section 400.

Third – the proposed rule language in Section 401 states that the owner of a unit “in
compliance with” Section 305 shall submit a Notification of Compliance. It would appear that a
better way to say this is to say “and subject to”, since it will trigger the obligation, rather than
assuming one is already met. In other words, the fact the unit is “subject to” a limit under
Section 305 is the trigger for the obligation, not “compliance with.”
Fourth - relates to the timeframe for submitting a notice. The Proposed Rule sets the
timeframe at 6 months from rule adoption. However, this creates a disconnect for a unit that may
be exempt under Section 104.4 for a year because it ran at a capacity factor of less than 10%. If
that unit in year 2 exceeded the partial exemption capacity factor and needed to comply with
Section 305, there is no way it could submit a notice 6 months from rule adoption. Accordingly,
we think it would read better if the Section said “6 months from becoming subject to Section 305
limits.”
Fifth - is to create a correlation between step 1 – Section 401, and step 2 – Section 402.
If a unit cannot submit a Notification of Compliance, there needs to be an “if-then” response.
We propose the language that says if you cannot comply with Section 401, then go to Section
402. Currently, the two sections are not linked and this creates a disconnect.
The amended rule language would look as follows:
401 IN EXISTENCE AND IN COMPLIANCE: Except as set forth in Section 104.4 and
the case-by-case RACT analysis of Section 305.1 of this rule, T the owner or operator of any
electric utility stationary gas turbine, electric utility steam generating unit or cogeneration steam
generating unit used to generate electric power in existence on [date of rule adoption] and subject
to in compliance with the emission limits in Section 305 of this rule shall submit a Notification
of Compliance [date within 6 months of becoming subject to Section 305 limits rule adoption].
This Notification shall indicate how compliance with the NOx limits has been determined and if
performance testing is required to demonstrate compliance. If performance testing is required to
demonstrate compliance, the Notification shall include a timeline for the test. Performance test
results from a past test may be used for this determination, as long as the test was conducted
within 5 years before [date of rule adoption]. If compliance under this section cannot be
demonstrated, owner or operator must comply with Section 402 of this rule.
b. Section 402 In Existence and Non-Compliant
Similar to the comments regarding Section 401 above, we would recommend adding the
exceptions of Sections 104.4 and 305.1 to this Section. Additionally, we would recommend
deleting the last sentence of this Section, as it does not appear to relate to the rulemaking. We
are unaware of any “interim compliance” options within the rule.
The amended rule language would look as follows:
402.1 Except as set forth in Section 104.4 and the case-by-case RACT analysis of Section
305.1 of this rule, W when air pollution control equipment is required to achieve the emission
limits in Section 305 of this rule, the owner or operator shall comply with the increments of
progress in Section 402.2 of this rule and be in compliance with the emission limits by the date
specified in Section 402.2 of this rule. Interim compliance with the emission limits in Sections

305 of this rule does not exclude the owner or operator from final compliance with the emission
limits in Section 305 of this rule and the increments of progress in Section 402.2 of this rule.
c. 402.3 Removal From Service:
This Section provides an avenue for units that would be retired from service in lieu of
emissions controls or a case-by-case RACT analysis and permit limit. To make this Section
more functional for the retiring units it is important to make the effectiveness of the section not
linked to the adoption of the rule, but rather linked to the decision by the owner to retire the unit.
For example, Section 402.3 limits the window of opportunity to only 24 months. If a Section
104.4 partial exemption unit is exempt for 2 years and then exceeds its capacity factor, rather
than installing emissions controls to meet Section 305, it may seek removal from service. As
proposed, this would not be possible since this section would only be available for 24 months
after the rule is adopted. Instead, we would suggest that Section 402.3 be based on when a unit
otherwise becomes subject to Section 305 emission limits. The offered language makes this
possible, without changing obligations on existing units which do not have a partial exemption.
The second issue is to add a similar scope to the Section 402.3(a) which, as written, limits
the ability of a unit to submit a notice for removal from service to only 6 months after rule
adoption. As noted above, by linking it to when a unit becomes subject to Section 305 emissions
limits it provides an option for units which may be otherwise exempt during the first 6 months
after the rule is adopted.
The third issue is to remove the requirement for “requesting an exemption” and instead
require that the owner or operator merely submit a notice of proposed removal. This reduces the
burden on the County to create and issue an exemption when there is no reason for the extra
paperwork. Additionally, it reduces any delay caused by waiting on the County to issue the
exemption. As amended, the unit would submit the notice and then proceed to the formal
submittal of the decommissioning plan and permit revision, which is the document upon which
the County can focus its efforts.
Finally, Section 402.3(c) appears to have a mismatch between the use of 4 months of plan
approval and in the final sentence a limitation on operations past 3 months. This inconsistency
can be fixed by merely changing the 3 months to 4 months.
The amended rule language would look as follows:
402.3 Removal From Service: The owner or operator of any electric utility stationary gas
turbine, electric utility steam generating unit or cogeneration steam generating unit used to
generate electric power in existence on [date of rule adoption] that is expected to be removed
from service within 24 months of [date of rule adoption] becoming subject to Section 305
emission limits shall be exempt from the emission limits in Section 305 of this rule if it complies
with the following:
a. Within 6 months of becoming subject to Section 305 emission limits [date of rule adoption],
submit to the Control Officer a notification requesting an exemption from the emission limits in
Section 305 of this rule of Proposed Removal from Service.
b. Within 14 months of submitting notification under Section 402.3(a) receiving the exemption,
submit to the Control Officer a decommissioning plan and a permit revision providing that the
units will be decommissioned by a certain date.

c. Within 4 months of decommissioning plan and permit revision approval, discontinue operation
of the electric utility stationary gas turbine, electric utility steam generating unit or cogeneration
steam generating unit used to generate electric power, disconnect the fuel supply line(s), and
notify the Control Officer in writing of the removal from service. Operation of any electric utility
stationary gas turbine, electric utility steam generating unit or cogeneration steam generating unit
used to generate electric power beyond 3 4 months of decommissioning plan and permit revision
approval, shall be conducted in compliance with the emission limits in Section 305 of this rule.
VIII. Emergency Standby Units
In this Section the County appears to be limiting the affected units to “emergency standby
units”, however the sentence includes all affected units. It would appear that the solution for this
paragraph would be to limit the affected units.
The amended rule language would look as follows:
403 EMERGENCY STANDBY UNITS: The owner or operator of any Emergency Standby
Unit electric utility stationary gas turbine, electric utility steam generating unit or cogeneration
steam generating unit used to generate electric power in existence prior to [date of rule adoption]
shall, [within 2 months of rule adoption], submit to the Control Officer a notification requesting
an exemption from the requirements of Section 300 of this rule.
IX. Section 501.7 - Recordkeeping
Under the record keeping requirements, the County proposes that the records
demonstrating compliance with Sections 104.4, 305.1 and 305.2 include 12 month rolling
averages. The inclusion of “12 month rolling period” conflicts with the measurements set forth
in Sections 305.1 and 305.2. The general purpose of this section appears to be a requirement to
keep records. By eliminating the contradictory language, we can still maintain the necessary
records and not introduce confusion to the compliance obligation.
The amended rule language would look as follows:
501.7 Equipment Referenced In Sections 104.4, 305.1, and 305.2: Maintain records necessary
covering a 12-month rolling period to demonstrate compliance with Sections 104.4, 305.1, or
305.2, as applicable.
Rule 323 Fuel Burning Equipment from industrial/Commercial/Institutional (ICI) Sources
During the County workshops discussing Rule 323, APS brought to the County’s attention the
dilemma caused by the inspection requirements related to boilers. APS has installed a Clayton
Boiler on its process equipment. This boiler is a state-of-the-art boiler and as such has a sealed
burner chamber which does not allow for inspection of the combustion chamber, burner or flame
pattern as required under Section 304.1(a). Rather than be penalized for having such an
advanced and efficient burner that does not allow for inspection, APS suggested that the County
provide an exception to allow APS to operate the burner in compliance with the manufacturer’s

recommended procedures. At the time of the workshops, the County was open to the suggestion
and offered no indication that it would not approve such a solution. We hope this was an
oversight on the County’s part, but if the County should need additional information, please let
us know and we will be happy to provide it.
The amended rule language would look as follows:
304 LIMITATIONS – NITROGEN OXIDES:
304.1 An owner or operator of any combustion equipment listed in Section 102 of this
rule, except gas turbines, with a heat input of greater than 10 MMBtu/hr to 100 MMBtu/hr,
except gas turbines, shall comply either with (a) or (b) below Sections 304.1(a) or 304.1(b) of
this rule. Gas turbines are subject to both Sections 304.1(a) and 304.1(b) of this rule below:
a. Establish initial optimal baseline concentrations for NOx and CO within 90 days of the
first usage of the combustion equipment utilizing the initial design burner specifications or
manufacturer’s recommendations to ensure good combustion practices. Tune the unit annually in
accordance with good combustion practices or a follow the manufacturer’s recommended
procedure, if applicable. , that will include the following at a minimum: If using good
combustion practices, the owner or operator shall include the following at a minimum:
(1) Inspect the burner system and clean and replace any components of the burner as
necessary to minimize emissions of NOx and CO; and
(2) Inspect the burner chamber for areas of impingement and remove if necessary; and
(3) Inspect the flame pattern and make adjustments as necessary to optimize the flame
pattern; and
(4) Inspect the system controlling the air-to-fuel ratio and ensure that it is correctly
calibrated and functioning properly; and
(5) Measure the NOx and the CO concentration of the effluent stream after each
adjustment was made with a handheld portable monitor to ensure optimal baseline concentrations
are maintained.
(6) For low emission burner systems that do not provide accessibility for combustion
chamber inspection, burner inspection, and inspection of the flame pattern, an owner or operator
shall provide documentation from the manufacturer and follow manufacturer’s recommended
procedure.
Again, we want to express our thanks to the County for the work that it did to create these
and the other rules as part of this significant rulemaking. And we are grateful for the opportunity
to comment and add what we hope is constructive and useful comments to the rule. If the
County has questions or requires greater information related to our comments, please do not
hesitate to contact us.
Sincerely,
Submitted Electronically
Michael Denby
Environmental Policy & Programs
Arizona Public Service Company

Michelle Mada - AQDX
From: Hether Krause - AQDX
Sent: Monday, June 13, 2016 3:43 PM
To: Johanna Kuspert - AQDX
Subject: Fwd: EPA Comments on Maricopa 322, 323 & 324
Sent from my iPhone
Begin forwarded message:
From: "Steckel, Andrew" <Steckel.Andrew@epa.gov>
Date: June 13, 2016 at 3:23:25 PM MST
To: "Heather Krause (hkrause@mail.maricopa.gov)" <hkrause@mail.maricopa.gov>, "Marina
Mejia (Mejia.Marina@azdeq.gov)" <Mejia.Marina@azdeq.gov>
Cc: "Gong, Kevin" <Gong.Kevin@epa.gov>, "McKaughan, Colleen"
<McKaughan.Colleen@epa.gov>, "Tong, Stanley" <Tong.Stanley@epa.gov>, "Yannayon,
Laura" <Yannayon.Laura@epa.gov>
Subject: EPA Comments on Maricopa 322, 323 & 324
United States Environmental Protection Agency
Region IX
75 Hawthorne Street
San Francisco, CA 94105-3901
June 13, 2016
Transmittal of EPA Rule Review Comments
To: Hether Krause, Maricopa County Environmental Services Department
hkrause@mail.maricopa.gov
Marina Mejia, Arizona Department Of Environmental Quality
mejia.marina@azdeq.gov
From: Andrew Steckel, Rulemaking Office Chief
steckel.andrew@epa.gov
Re: Maricopa County Air Quality Department, Draft Rule 322 “Power Plant Operations,” Draft
Rule 323 “Fuel Burning Equipment from Industrial/Commercial/Institutional (ICI)
Sources,” and Draft Rule 324 “Stationary Internal Combustion (IC) Engines,” posted for
public comment starting May 13, 2016.
We are providing comments on the draft rules identified above, based on our preliminary review and our
phone discussions with County staff on June 7, 2016. EPA provided comments on earlier drafts of these
rules on March 16, 2016. We appreciate that Maricopa reviewed and addressed some of our concerns,
but some of our comments below reference discussion from this earlier letter. Please direct any
questions about our comments to me at (415) 947-4115 or to Kevin Gong at (415) 972-3073.

Rule 322 – Power Plant Operations
Section 102 Applicability
The draft rule language states that subject equipment built or modified after May 10, 1996 must comply
with the limits in this rule, unless the equipment is already subject to more stringent federally enforceable
standards, such as NSPS and NESHAPs standards. This exception conflicts with the Clean Air Act
requirement that ‘major sources’ in ozone nonattainment areas classified at moderate or higher must be
regulated under a SIP-approved RACT rule. If the District determines that different levels of RACT are
appropriate for different types, sizes or ages of equipment, EPA recommends outlining separate emission
limits for these different classes of equipment.
Section 104 Exemptions
104.4 The draft rule language presumes that equipment operating at less than or equal to a 10% annual
capacity factor is exempt from NOx and CO limits, and is exempt from emission control monitoring
system requirements in sections 305, 306 and 307.4. To ensure enforceability, please provide a definition
for the term “annual capacity factor” in Section 200.
104.1.c. This provision provides that gas turbines used at military training facilities and military gas
turbines used anywhere other than a garrison are exempt from the listed sections. Please remove this
exemption or provide definitions for the terms “military training facilities” and “military gas turbines”, and
demonstrate in the rule's staff report why these gas turbines should not be subject to the specified
emission standards.
Section 200 Definitions
Section 237 The second sentence in the definition of Total Dissolved Solids (TDS) appears to describe
the methodology that should be used to determine TDS. This sentence should be removed and the first
sentence modified to read “…glass fiber filter, as determined by Test Method XXX.”
Old Section 301
The current SIP contains language proposed for deletion which regulates particulate matter (PM)
emissions. We note that this section only applies to two units constructed prior to 1996. Please either
retain these limits for those units at a minimum, or provide an adequate CAA 110(l) demonstration which
supports removing these requirements for those units.
New Section 301
The draft rule language appears to state that “good combustion practices” are met for turbines if CEMS
are used (last sentence). It appears the District intends to say that if equipment is utilizing a CEMS, which
already monitors various operating parameters, then the equipment would be exempt from the
requirements of Section 301. Please revise accordingly if this is correct or otherwise clarify the intent of
this last sentence. This provision is also found in Section 501.6.
Section 307
The definition of an “approved combustion control system” is unclear. The District must define the criteria
for approval, and EPA must review and approve of any such alternative control systems if the criteria are
not specific.
The inclusion of “other monitoring system approved by the Control Officer” is an inappropriate allowance
of director’s discretion and should be removed or require EPA approval.

EPA recognizes that a Predictive Emissions Monitoring System (PEMS), if certified in accordance with the
applicable provisions of Performance Specification 16, may be appropriate for certain emission units. We
recommend that their usage for compliance purposes be restricted to units with a heat input rate of 250
MMBtu/hr or less, which aligns with other Federal guidance.
The provision that allows the Control Officer to approve any other monitoring system to be equivalent to a
CEMS is too broad. Please strike this language, or also require that EPA must approve of any such
alternative monitoring systems.
Low Mass Emissions (LME) as cited at 219 and 307.4 is not a suitable substitute for Continuous
Emissions Monitoring Systems (CEMS) for the purposes of SIP compliance determination with an
emissions limit.
Section 504
Alternative test methods may not be used upon sole approval by the Control Officer. Please delete this
provision or include language that also requires EPA approval for alternative methods.
Rule 323 – Fuel Burning Equipment from ICI Sources
Section 104
As we have stated in previous comments for this section, please include:
1. appropriate limits on the length of emergency condition and alternative emergency limits for units fired
with emergency fuel that are otherwise normally fired with natural gas and,
2. Clarification on the exceptions for units at military training facilities, as this is not defined.
Section 301.3
As stated in previous comments for this section, please define the frequency of monitoring required to
comply with the provisions for “good combustion practices” for turbines.
Section 306.1
A facility may comply with the emission limits in the rule by installing and operating an emission control
system (ECS). While an ECS may be one possible way to meeting emission limits, it generally cannot
substitute for meeting limits, unless specific control measures or a percent effectiveness are defined as a
part of any required ECS that may be approved by the Control Officer. The definition of an ECS at section
206 also allows discretion to the Control Officer on the types of required control devices, practices, and
monitoring needs for an effective ECS. Please either define a set of specific required control technologies
or practices that must be a part of any effective ECS, or define a required emissions reduction (for
example, 80% reduction of existing NOx emissions).
Section 503.1a
This section allows for various documents to verify compliance with the ultra-low sulfur diesel fuel limit.
Maricopa County should ensure the documents listed give accurate values and use enforceable test
methods. For example, EPA generally has not approved the use of Safety Data Sheets (SDS)/Material
Data Safety Sheets (MSDS) to determine compliance in SIP rules unless the SDS/MSDS specifies that
the compound of interest was determined by an approved EPA method.
Sections 503.2a (Source Test) and 503.3 (CEMS)
These sections state that no compliance determinations will be made during startup and shutdown. This
does not align with EPA’s startup, shutdown, and malfunction (SSM) policy, particularly in the case of

CEMS-equipped units (see EPA’s Startup, Shutdown and Malfunction Policy at
https://www3.epa.gov/airquality/urbanair/sipstatus/emissions.html).
Please revise Draft Rule 323 to include alternative numerical limits for operations during these periods,
require best operating practices (see, for example, Yolo-Solano Air Quality Management District Rule
2.34 for Stationary Gas Turbines), or require that units comply with the standard limits during SSM
events.
Section 504
Alternative test methods may not be use upon sole approval by the Control Officer. Please remove this
provision or include language that also requires EPA approval for alternative methods.
Rule 324 – Stationary Reciprocating IC Engines
Sections 103.2b and 212.1d
As stated in previous comments, these sections allows discretion to the Control Officer on the definition of
“nonroad engine” without guidance or restriction on how the Control Officer shall make that determination.
Please remove this discretion.
Section 304.3
Limits for engines subject to NSPS are not automatically considered RACT by EPA for the purposes of
SIP approval. The District must provide analysis that NSPS requirements cited here meet RACT, or
provide the intended numerical limits and operational requirements explicitly within this rule for EPA to
review for SIP approval purposes.
Sections 207, 208 and 306
New language at section 306 treats equivalent and identical replacement engines the same as the
engines they are replacing for the purposes of rule compliance. However, the definition for “Equivalent
Replacement Engine” would allow for an engine that could be up to 20% larger than the original engine,
with the requirement that such larger replacement must also decrease NOx emissions by at least 2%.
While this does not pose an approvability issue for Draft Rule 324, the County should clarify that this
definition only applies in this context, and does not have broader implications.
Section 501.4
This section allows for various documents to verify compliance with the ultra low sulfur diesel fuel limit.
Maricopa County should ensure the documents listed give accurate values and use enforceable test
methods. For example, EPA generally has not approved the use of SDS)/MSDS to determine compliance
in SIP rules unless the SDS/MSDS specifies that the compound of interest was determined by an
approved EPA method.
Section 503
Alternative test methods may not be used upon sole approval by the Control Officer. Please remove this
provision or include language that also requires EPA approval for alternative methods.








Return to list of attachments

Executive Summary Return to list of attachments
of the Report to the Board of Supervisors
Prepared by the Maricopa County Air Quality Department
Board Hearing Date: November 2, 2016
Case #/Title: AQ-2015-003-Rule 323 (Fuel Burning Equipment From
Industrial/Commercial/Institutional (ICI) Sources)
Agenda Item:
Supervisor Districts: All Districts
The Maricopa County Air Quality Department (department) complied with all statutory and county policies
throughout this rulemaking process. Per the Enhanced Regulatory Outreach Program (EROP) Policy: “In addition
to the required staff report, an executive summary of the report including an overview of stakeholder input and
staff responses will be provided to the Board of Supervisors at least one week prior to any Board of Supervisors’
public hearing.”
Overview Of The Report To The Board Of Supervisors:
The department is requesting the Board of Supervisors to approve amendments to Maricopa County Air Pollution
Control Regulations regarding Rule 323 (Fuel Burning Equipment From Industrial/Commercial/Institutional (ICI)
Sources) and approve submitting the amended rule as a revision to the (Arizona) State Implementation Plan (SIP).
The purpose of this rulemaking is to address the requirements of the SIP for “moderate” nonattainment for the
2008 eight-hour ozone national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS). The proposed amendments in Rule 323
include Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT) for nitrogen oxides (NOx).
Overview Of Stakeholder Input And Staff Responses:
Three Stakeholder Workshops were held: June 29, 2015, September 3, 2015, and February 18, 2016. Stakeholders
expressed a general understanding for the need for rule revisions based on the department’s nonattainment status;
however, Stakeholders were concerned about the emission limitations and what is considered “RACT” and what
is considered “beyond RACT”. In addition, questions were raised regarding the following:
● Partial exemptions, particularly regarding stationary gas turbines
● Provisions for good combustion practices
● Source testing methods and frequency
A 30-day comment period was held May-June 2016. During the 30-day comment period, the department received
written comments from the Arizona Public Service Company (APS) and the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA). Stakeholders’ concerns were mainly clarifying in nature. Their comments addressed partial
exemptions, good combustion practices for turbines, emissions requirements for NOx, requirements for emissions
control systems (ECS), and compliance determinations.
The department discussed the comments with Stakeholders and reached an equitable consensus regarding how the
comments should be addressed. The department addressed all of the comments; responses have been incorporated
into the draft rule and are explained in the Preamble of the Draft Notice of Final Rulemaking.

Return to list of attachments
Report to the Board of Supervisors
Prepared by the Maricopa County Air Quality Department
Board of Health Meeting Date: April 25, 2016
Board Hearing Date: November 2, 2016
Case #/Title: AQ-2015-003-Rule 323 (Fuel Burning Equipment From
Industrial/Commercial/Institutional (ICI) Sources)
Agenda Item:
Supervisor Districts: All Districts
Applicant: Staff
Request: Approve amendments to Maricopa County Air Pollution Control
Regulations regarding Rule 323 (Fuel Burning Equipment From
Industrial/Commercial/Institutional (ICI) Sources) and approve
submitting the amended rule as a revision to the (Arizona) State
Implementation Plan (SIP).
The purpose of this rulemaking is to revise the rule to address the
requirements of the SIP for “moderate” nonattainment for the 2008 eight-
hour ozone national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS). The
proposed amendments in Rule 323 include Reasonably Available Control
Technology (RACT) for nitrogen oxides (NOx).
Support/Opposition: During the 30-day comment period, the department received written
comments from the Arizona Public Service Company (APS) and the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA); they stated their opinion as
“support” or “other”. Stakeholders’ concerns were mainly clarifying in
nature. Their comments addressed partial exemptions, good combustion
practices for turbines, emissions requirements for NOx, requirements for
emissions control systems (ECS), and compliance determinations.
Staff
Recommendation: Approve
Board of Health
Recommendation: Approve per Staff recommended language
Additional
Comments: This regulatory change is following the Enhanced Regulatory Outreach
Program (EROP) Policy and workflow process. The County Manager
briefed the Board of Supervisors regarding this rulemaking in May 2015.
Stakeholder workshops were held June 2015 through February 2016. On
April 25, 2016, the Board of Health approved this regulatory change for
the Expedited Process.
Presented By: Philip A. McNeely, R.G., Director
1

Prepared By: Hether Krause
Attachments: Summary of the proposed regulatory change (See Item 6 of the Draft
Notice of Final Rulemaking)
Analysis of input received during the process and how that input was
responded to (See Item 13 of the Draft Notice of Final Rulemaking)
Language of proposed regulatory change or amendment (See Item 17 of
the Draft Notice of Final Rulemaking)
Preamble required by Arizona Revised Statutes (A.R.S.) § 49-471.05
(See Draft Notice of Final Rulemaking)
Minutes from Board of Health meeting
Copies of all written and electronic Stakeholder input
Signed copy of the Maricopa County Resolution “Moratorium on
Increased Regulatory Burdens”
2

DRAFT NOTICE OF FINAL RULEMAKING Return to list of attachments
MARICOPA COUNTY AIR POLLUTION CONTROL REGULATIONS
REGULATION III – CONTROL OF AIR CONTAMINANTS
RULE 323: FUEL BURNING EQUIPMENT FROM INDUSTRIAL/COMMERCIAL/INSTITUTIONAL
(ICI) SOURCES
PREAMBLE
1. Rule affected Rulemaking action
Rule 323: Fuel Burning Equipment from Industrial/Commercial/Institutional
(ICI) Sources Amend
2. Statutory authority for the rulemaking:
Authorizing statutes: A.R.S. §§ 49-474, 49-479, and 49-480
Implementing Statute: A.R.S. § 49-112
3. The effective date of the rule:
Tentative date of adoption: November 2, 2016
4. List of public notices addressing this rulemaking:
Notice of Briefing to Maricopa County Manager: May 2015
Notice of Stakeholder Workshops: June 29, 2015, September 3, 2015, and February 18, 2016
Notice of Maricopa County Board of Health Meeting: April 25, 2016
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking: 22 A.A.R. 1134, May 13, 2016
5. Name and address of department personnel with whom persons may communicate regarding the
rulemaking:
Name: Johanna M. Kuspert or Hether Krause
Maricopa County Air Quality Department
Planning and Analysis Division
Address: 1001 N Central Avenue, Suite 125
Phoenix, Arizona 85004
Telephone: (602) 506-6010
Fax: (602) 506-6179
E-mail: aqplanning@mail.maricopa.gov Return to list of attachments
6. Explanation of the rule, including the department's reasons for initiating the rulemaking:
Summary:
Rule 323 (Fuel Burning Equipment from Industrial/Commercial/Institutional (ICI) Sources) limits the
discharge of nitrogen oxides (NOx), sulfur oxides, particulate matter and carbon monoxide emissions into
the atmosphere from fuel burning combustion equipment at industrial, commercial, and institutional (ICI)
sources. Revisions to Rule 323 are being proposed to address the requirements of the State Implementation
Plan (SIP) for “moderate” nonattainment for the 2008 eight-hour ozone national ambient air quality
standard (NAAQS). The proposed amendments in Rule 323 include Reasonably Available Control
Technology (RACT) for NOx.
In addition, the proposed amendments correct typographical or other clerical errors; make minor
grammatical changes to improve readability or clarity; modify the format, numbering, order, capitalization,
punctuation, or syntax of certain text to increase standardization within and among rules; or make various

other minor changes of a purely editorial nature. As these changes do not alter the sense, meaning, or effect
of the rules, they are not described in detail here, but can be readily discerned in the “underline/ strikeout”
version of the rules contained in Item 14 of this notice.
Issues Raised and Discussed During this Rulemaking Process:
Stakeholders expressed a general understanding for the need for rule revisions based on the department’s
nonattainment status; however, Stakeholders were concerned about the emission limitations and what is
considered “RACT” and what is considered “beyond RACT”. In addition, questions were raised regarding
the following:
• Partial exemptions, particularly regarding stationary gas turbines
• Provisions for good combustion practices
• Source testing methods and frequency
Description of Proposed Amendments:
Regarding Exemptions:
• Section 104.1(c) (Partial Exemptions): Rule 323 is proposed to be revised to clarify the partial
exemption for military training facilities. The EPA commented that the term “military training facility”
is unclear in this rule, especially as distinguished from other facilities such as “garrisons”. The EPA
suggested that this exemption should focus on the specific types of activities at these facilities that
reasonably require exemptions, rather than the facilities themselves. The EPA suggested using Imperial
County Air Pollution Control District, Rule 800, Section E(6) (General Requirements for Control of
Fine Particulate Matter (PM10)) as an example. The text proposed in Section 104.1(c) is from Imperial
County Air Pollution Control District, Rule 800, Section E(6) (General Requirements for Control of
Fine Particulate Matter (PM10)).
• Sections 104.1(f) and 104.2 (Partial Exemptions): Rule 323 is proposed to be revised to include source
specific limitations on emergency fuel use that is or will be incorporated in a source permit. The EPA
commented that engines and fuel use allow alternative emission limits from normal operating
conditions; this is generally allowable but must also include appropriate limits on the length of the
emergency condition and alternative emergency emission limits. EPA asked that the department revise
this section.
Regarding Limitations:
• Section 301.1 (Good Combustion Practices for Turbines): Rule 323 is proposed to include text
regarding the frequency of monitoring temperature differential across the combustion burners. The
EPA commented that the frequency of differential temperature measurement should be defined and
that continuous monitoring of this differential should be required.
• Section 303 (Limitations-Sulfur in Fuel): The limitations for sulfur in fuel are proposed to be changed
from “low sulfur fuel” to “ultra low sulfur diesel”; consistent with federal standards.
• Section 304.1(b)(1) (Limitations-Nitrogen Oxides): The NOx limitation when burning gaseous fossil
fuel is proposed to be changed from “155 ppm” to “42 ppmdv”. The U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) advised the department that this limitation is considered RACT for NOx; this limitation
is similar to limits in Imperial County’s (CA) RACT SIP for the 1997 ozone standard for turbines
(Rule 400.1 adopted 2010).
• Section 304.1(b)(2) (Limitations-Nitrogen Oxides): The NOx limitation when burning liquid fossil fuel
is proposed to be changed from “230 ppm” to “65 ppmdv”. The EPA advised the department that this
limitation is considered RACT for NOx; this limitation is similar to limits in Imperial County’s (CA)
RACT SIP for the 1997 ozone standard for turbines (Rule 400.1 adopted 2010).
Regarding Compliance with Nitrogen Oxides Limitations:
• Section 304.1 (Limitations-Nitrogen Oxides): Rule 323 is proposed to clarify which provisions a
source must comply with in order to be in compliance with the NOx limitations. A source can either

tune equipment annually in accordance with good combustion practices or follow the manufacturer’s
recommended procedure or a source can limit NOx emission to no more than 42 ppmdv when burning
gaseous fuel or to no more than 65 ppmdv when burning liquid fuel.
Regarding Administrative Requirements:
• Section 401 (Compliance Schedule): Rule 323 is proposed to include compliance schedules for filing
an Operation & Maintenance (O&M) Plan, for filing a schedule for making modifications to existing
Emission Control Systems (ECS), and for filing a schedule for installing an ECS.
Regarding Compliance Determinations:
• Section 503.1 (Compliance Determination-Ultra Low Sulfur Diesel Verification): The compliance
determination for low sulfur oil verification is proposed to be changed to a compliance determination
for ultra low sulfur diesel verification consistent with federal standards. Due to the EPA’s comments,
additional language was added to clarify that sulfur content verification documents must provide
accurate values and utilize enforceable test methods to determine the sulfur content. Also, the test
method for determining sulfur content of waste gas is proposed to be added in Sections 503.1(b) and
504.15 (Compliance Determination-Test Methods Incorporated by Reference).
• Section 503.2 (Compliance Determination-Gaseous Emissions-Source Test): The size of boilers that
must conduct performance (stack) tests is proposed to be changed from “10 MMBtu” to “100
MMBtu”. The Arizona Public Service Company (APS) submitted a comment on February 22, 2016.
They stated that Section 503.2 should be rewritten to be applicable to unit 100 MMBtu or larger,
because it does not make sense to have stack testing for such small units.
• Sections 503.2 (Compliance Determination-Gaseous Emissions-Source Test) and 503.3 (Compliance
Determination-Gaseous Emissions-Continuous Emission Monitoring System (CEMS)): The text
proposed in Sections 503.2 and 503.3 is from Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management
District Rule 411 (NOx from Boilers, Process Heaters and Steam Generators). The EPA advised the
department that, when updating Rule 323 to include RACT, the department should consider other
agencies’ rules. Proposed text for Sections 503.2(c) and (d) regarding test runs and test protocols have
been removed, per the EPA’s comments that this language would allow Control Officer discretion on
testing operations that may lead to poor operating data. Proposed text for Sections 503.2(a) and 503.3
regarding compliance determinations during startup and shutdown have been removed (“All emissions
determinations shall be made during normal operating conditions, except no compliance determination
shall be established during unit startup and shutdown”), due to the EPA’s comments that this language
does not align with the EPA’s startup, shutdown, and malfunction policy.
• Sections 503.2(c) and (d) (Compliance Determination-Gaseous Emissions-Source Test): The text
proposed in Sections 503.2(c) and (d) is proposed to be deleted; the text is from Sacramento
Metropolitan Air Quality Management District Rule 411 (NOx from Boilers, Process Heaters and
Steam Generators) and regards procedures in the event that a sample is accidentally lost or conditions
occur in which one of the three runs must be discontinued and states that a source test reports may be
determined to be invalid. The EPA commented that this would allow Control Officer discretion on
testing operations that may lead to poor operating data and recommended removing these provisions.
• Section 504 (Compliance Determination-Test Methods Incorporated by Reference): Rule 323 is
proposed to include a provision that allows for the use of alternative test methods to determine
compliance with the rule and to clarify the provision regarding when more than one test method is
permitted for a compliance determination.
• Section 504.12 (Compliance Determination-Test Methods Incorporated by Reference): The test
method “American Society of Testing Materials, ASTM Method D1266-98, (“Standard Test Method
for Sulfur in Petroleum Products - Lamp Method”), 1998” is proposed to be deleted. The EPA
commented that the test method may not be appropriate; its range is 0.01-0.4% which will not be able
to verify compliance with the definition of ultra low sulfur diesel fuel at <0.0015%.
7. Demonstration of compliance with A.R.S. §49-112:

Under A.R.S. § 49-479(C), a county may not adopt a rule or ordinance that is more stringent than the rules
adopted by the Director of the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ) for similar sources
unless it demonstrates compliance with the applicable requirements of A.R.S. §49-112.
§ 49-112 County regulation; standards
§ 49-112(A)
When authorized by law, a county may adopt a rule, ordinance or other regulation that is more stringent
than or in addition to a provision of this title or rule adopted by the director or any board or commission
authorized to adopt rules pursuant to this title if all of the following conditions are met:
1. The rule, ordinance or other regulation is necessary to address a peculiar local condition.
2. There is credible evidence that the rule, ordinance or other regulation is either;
(a) Necessary to prevent a significant threat to public health or the environment that results from a
peculiar local condition and is technically and economically feasible.
(b) Required under a federal statute or regulation, or authorized pursuant to an intergovernmental
agreement with the federal government to enforce federal statutes or regulations if the county rule,
ordinance or other regulation is equivalent to federal statutes or regulation.
3. Any fee or tax adopted under the rule, ordinance or other regulation will not exceed the reasonable
costs of the county to issue and administer that permit or plan approval program.
§ 49-112(B)
When authorized by law, a county may adopt rules, ordinances or other regulations in lieu of a state
program that are as stringent as a provision of this title or rule adopted by the director or any board or
commission authorized to adopt rules pursuant to this title if the county demonstrates that the cost of
obtaining permits or other approvals from the county will approximately equal or be less than the fee or
cost of obtaining similar permits or approvals under this title or any rule adopted pursuant to this title. If the
state has not adopted a fee or tax for similar permits or approvals, the county may adopt a fee when
authorized by law in the rule, ordinance or other regulation that does not exceed the reasonable costs of the
county to issue and administer that permit or plan approval program.
The department complies with A.R.S. § 49-112(A) in that Maricopa County fails to meet the National
Ambient Air Quality Standards for both ozone and particulates. While currently classified as a “marginal”
ozone nonattainment area, the county recently failed to meet 2008 8-hour ozone standard by the marginal
area attainment date and anticipates EPA will issue a notice proposing to re-classify the area to “moderate”.
Further, a portion of the county was classified as a serious ozone nonattainment area under the previous 1-
hour ozone standard requiring the county to continue to maintain the measures and requirements that
allowed the county to attain that standard. Currently, a portion of Maricopa County and Apache Junction in
Pinal County is designated serious nonattainment for the PM10 24-hour standard. This is the only serious
PM10 nonattainment area in Arizona. Revisions to Rule 323 are being proposed to address the requirements
of the State Implementation Plan (SIP) for “moderate” nonattainment for the 2008 eight-hour ozone
national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS). The proposed amendments in Rule 323 include
Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT) for NOx.
The department complies with A.R.S. § 49-112(B) in that the proposed amendments to Rule 323 are not
more stringent than or in addition to a provision of Title 49 or rule adopted by the director or any board or
commission authorized to adopt rules pursuant to Title 49, address the peculiar local conditions in
Maricopa County, are authorized under A.R.S. Title 49, Chapter 3, Article 3, and are not in lieu of a state
program.
8. Documents or studies referenced and/or reviewed for this rulemaking:
Not applicable
9. Showing of good cause why the rule is necessary to promote a statewide interest if the rule will
diminish a previous grant of authority of a political subdivision:
Not applicable

10. Summary of the economic, small business, and consumer impact:
The following discussion addresses each of the elements required for an economic, small business and
consumer impact statement under A.R.S. § 41-1055.
An identification of the rulemaking.
This rulemaking is proposing to revise Rule 323 (Fuel Burning from Industrial, Commercial, and
Institutional (ICI) Sources).
An identification of the persons who will be directly affected by, bear the costs of or directly benefit
from the rulemaking.
The persons who will be directly affected by and bear the costs of this rulemaking will be facilities in
Maricopa County that use ICI sources that burn either fossil fuels or alternative fuels where the sources
include any of the following:
• Steam generating unit with a maximum design rated heat input capacity from fuels combusted in the
unit of greater than 10 million BTU/hr;
• Stationary gas turbines with a heat input at peak load equal to or greater than 2.9 megawatts (MW);
• Cogeneration steam generating unit with a heat input of greater than 10 million Btu/hr;
• Indirect-fired process heater with a heat input greater than 10 million Btu/hr.
The department has issued permits to more than 130 facilities with sources applicable to Rule 323.
A cost benefit analysis of the following:
(a) The probable costs and benefits to the implementing agency and other agencies directly affected
by the implementation and enforcement of the rulemaking.
It is expected that the department will benefit from the increased clarity of the rule with decreased time
to inspect a facility or prepare a permit. In addition, the rulemaking will not impose increased
monetary or regulatory costs on other state agencies, political subdivisions of this state, persons, or
individuals so regulated.
The assumptions of savings with the rule revisions will be reviewed after rule implementation to
confirm their effectiveness. However, the benefits of the rule revision are anticipated to be a result of
the following changes:
• Applying limitations for fuel sulfur content to ultra low sulfur diesel (from “low sulfur fuel”) to be
consistent with federal requirements;
• Changing NOx limitations when burning gaseous fossil fuel from 155 ppm to 42 ppmdv, and
when burning liquid gaseous fossil fuel from 230 ppm to 65 ppmdv to be consistent with federal
requirements and what EPA considers to be RACT for NOx.
• Clarifying compliance requirements that apply to a source in order to meet the NOx limitations;
• Adding requirements for schedules pertaining to filing an Operation & Maintenance Plan (O&M)
Plan, and when modifying or installing a new Emission Control System (ECS); and
• Clarifying compliance determination test methods that apply for determining fuel sulfur content,
NOx (and CO) emissions for boilers with a heat input capacity of 100 MMBtu per hour or greater,
and methods for boilers equipped with continuous emission monitoring system (CEMS).
These revisions align Maricopa County requirements with existing federal performance standards. In
addition, the sources subject to the revised Rule 323 already have permits in which these requirements
are addressed. Therefore, this revised rule does not impose new requirements on the subject facilities,
and no costs would be incurred for compliance with the rule revisions.
(b) The probable costs and benefits to a political subdivision of this state directly affected by the
implementation and enforcement of the rulemaking

The rule revisions will not impose increased monetary or regulatory costs on other state agencies,
political subdivisions of this state, persons, or individuals so regulated.
(c) The probable costs and benefits to businesses directly affected by the rulemaking, including any
anticipated effect on the revenues or payroll expenditures of employers who are subject to the
rulemaking.
The department anticipates that increased clarity provided by the Rule 323 revisions will provide a
benefit to the regulated community; it will take less time for sources subject to the rule to understand
and comply with the rule, which leads to increased compliance, which leads to decreased costs of
compliance to the regulated community. The department does not anticipate these rule revisions to
have a significant impact on a person's income, revenue, or employment in this state related to this
activity. The rule revision will not impose increased monetary or regulatory costs on individuals so
regulated.
A general description of the probable impact on private and public employment in businesses,
agencies and political subdivisions of this state directly affected by the rulemaking.
The rule revisions will not impose increased monetary or regulatory costs on other state agencies, political
subdivisions of this state, persons, or individuals so regulated.
A statement of the probable impact of the rulemaking on small businesses.
The rule revisions will not impose increased monetary or regulatory costs on any business, persons, or
individuals so regulated.
(a) An identification of the small businesses subject to the rulemaking.
Small businesses subject to this rulemaking are those facilities in Maricopa County that use ICI
sources that burn either fossil fuels or alternative fuels where the sources include any of the following:
a steam generating unit with a maximum design rated heat input capacity from fuels combusted in the
unit of greater than 10 million BTU/hr; a stationary gas turbine with a heat input at peak load equal to
or greater than 2.9 megawatts (MW); a cogeneration steam generating unit with a heat input of greater
than 10 million Btu/hr; and, an indirect-fired process heater with a heat input greater than 10 million
Btu/hr.
(b) The administrative and other costs required for compliance with the rulemaking.
This rulemaking updates and clarifies existing rule provisions and definitions to be consistent with
federal performance standards, and to reduce confusion and improve understanding and readability.
The department considered the implications of the proposed amendments to the regulated entities and
the implementing agency and deemed that none of the rule revisions have potentially significant
economic impacts.
(c) A description of the methods that the agency may use to reduce the impact on small businesses.
(i) Establishing less costly compliance requirements in the rulemaking for small businesses.
By correcting and clarifying existing rule provisions and definitions, this rulemaking lessens or
eases the regulatory burden for small businesses.
(ii) Establishing less costly schedules or less stringent deadlines for compliance in the
rulemaking.
This rulemaking corrects or clarifies existing rule provisions and definitions to reduce confusion
and improve understanding and readability.
(iii) Exempting small businesses from any or all requirements of the rulemaking.
This rulemaking corrects or clarifies existing rule provisions and definitions to reduce confusion
and improve understanding and readability.
(d) The probable cost and benefit to private persons and consumers who are directly affected by the
rulemaking.

This rulemaking does not impose any new compliance burdens on regulated entities or introduce
additional regulatory requirements and will not impose increased monetary or regulatory costs on any
business, persons, or individuals so regulated. As such, there are no costs to pass through to consumers
which means there are no impacts on consumers.
A statement of the probable effect on state revenues.
The rule revisions will not impose increased monetary or regulatory costs on other state agencies, political
subdivisions of this state, persons, or individuals so regulated. Without costs to pass through to customers,
there is no projected change in consumer purchase patterns and, thus, no impact on state revenues from
sales taxes.
A description of any less intrusive or less costly alternative methods of achieving the purpose of the
rulemaking.
This rulemaking corrects or clarifies existing rule provisions and definitions to reduce confusion and
improve understanding and readability.
11. Name and address of department personnel with whom persons may communicate regarding the
accuracy of the economic, small business, and consumer impact:
Name: Johanna M. Kuspert or Hether Krause
Maricopa County Air Quality Department
Planning and Analysis Division
Address: 1001 N Central Avenue, Suite 125
Phoenix, AZ 85004
Telephone: (602) 506-6010
Fax: (602) 506-6179
E-mail: aqplanning@mail.maricopa.gov
12. Description of the changes between the proposed rule, including supplemental notices and final rule:
Since the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking was published on May 13, 2016 (22 A.A.R 1134), the
department is proposing the following additional amendments:
• Section 104.1(c) (Partial Exemptions): Propose to not include new text “used in the following military
training activities conducted by the Department of Defense: (1) military tactical training or (2)
maintenance, repair, and removal of targets and munitions associated with military tactical training; or”.
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) commented in June 2016 to remove this exemption or
provide definitions for the terms “military training facilities” and “military gas turbines” and demonstrate
why these gas turbines should not be subject to the specified emission standards. Propose to delete the
partial exemption for stationary gas turbines used at military training facilities.
• Section 104.1(e) (Partial Exemptions): Propose to not include new text “and that are or will be
incorporated in a permit” and to include the text “…as allowed by a permit”.
• Section 104.2 (Partial Exemptions): Propose to not include new text “and that are or will be incorporated
in a permit” and to include the text “…as allowed by a permit”.
• Section 219 (Definition of “Steady State”): Propose to add the definition of “Steady State”.
• Section 224 (Definition of “Waste Derived Fuel Gas”): Propose to revise the definition of “Waste
Derived Fuel Gas” to match the definition in Rule 324 (Stationary Internal Combustion (IC) Engines);
deleted “sewage sludge” from the list of examples of waste derived fuel gas because sewage sludge is not
a gas.
• Section 301.1 (Limitations-Particulate Matter-Limitations-Liquid Fuels): Propose to include new text
“during steady state operations” after “in excess of 0.10 lbs. per MMBtu”.

• Section 301.3 (Limitations-Particulate Matter-Good Combustion Practices for Turbines): Propose to
include new text “during steady state operations” at the beginning of the first sentence.
• Section 304.1(a) (Limitations-Nitrogen Oxides): Propose to include new text before the last sentence “for
low emission burner systems that do not provide accessibility for combustion chamber inspection, burner
inspection, or inspection of the flame pattern, an owner or operator shall provide documentation from the
manufacturer and follow manufacture’s recommended procedure”, per comments from APS.
• Sections 304.1(b)(1) and (2) (Limitations-Nitrogen Oxides): Propose to include new text “or other EPA-
approved test method designated by the Control Officer” after the phrase “EPA Reference Method(s) 7”.
• Section 304.1(c) (Limitations-Nitrogen Oxides): Propose to include new text “during steady state
operations” at the end of the first sentence.
• Section 305 (Limitations-Carbon Monoxide): Propose to include new text “during steady state operations
and “or other EPA-approved test method designated by the Control Officer” in the second sentence and
propose to add new text “during steady state operations” after “…corrected to 15% oxygen” in the
second-to-the-last sentence.
• Section 306.1 (Requirements for Air Pollution Control Equipment and ECS Monitoring Equipment-
Emission Control System): Propose to include new text at the end-of the sentence “or a combustion
control system which reduces emissions to below the applicable standards in Section 300 of this rule”.
• Section 503.1 (Compliance Determination-Sulfur In Fuel Verification): Propose to change the headings
of Sections 503.1, 503.1(a), and 503.1(b) to more clearly distinguish what the sections address.
• Section 503.1(a) (Compliance Determination-Sulfur In Fuel Verification-Ultra Low Sulfur Diesel):
Propose to revise the new text proposed after the list of items in Sections 503.1(a)(1)-(6) to change “and
utilize” to “or be based on” and to add “as approved by the Administrator” after “test methods”.
• Section 503.1(a)(4) (Compliance Determination-Sulfur In Fuel Verification-Ultra Low Sulfur Diesel):
Propose to remove Safety Data Sheets (SDS)/Material Safety Data Sheets (MSDS) from the list of
documentation of the sulfur content of the fuel oil, per the EPA comments.
• Sections 503.2(a) and (b) (Compliance Determination-Gaseous Emissions-Source Test): Propose to not
include new text regarding specific test methods to be used to determine compliance with NOx and CO
and regarding discontinuing a scheduled source test; these requirements are addressed in performance
testing protocol.
• Section 503.3 (Compliance Determination-Gaseous Emissions-Continuous Emission Monitoring System
(CEMS)): Propose to not include new text “NOx” in the introductory statement; CEMS can be used for
other pollutants. Introductory statement is proposed to read in part: Compliance with the emission
requirements specified…
• Section 504 (Compliance Determination-Test Methods Incorporated By Reference): Propose to delete the
provision allowing test methods to be used upon sole approval by the Control Officer and propose to add
text that allows test methods as approved by the Administrator to be used, per the EPA’s comments.
13. Summary of the comments made regarding the rule and the department response to them:
Since the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking was published on May 13, 2016 (22 A.A.R. 1134), the
department received comments from the Arizona Public Service Company (APS) and the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). The comments and the department’s responses are provided
below.
Comment #1: Sections 104.1(c) (Partial Exemptions)
The EPA asks that the County clarify the exceptions for units at military training facilities, as this is not
defined.
Response #1: Section 104.1(c) (Partial Exemptions)
Return to list of attachments

The department proposes to not include new text “used in the following military training activities
conducted by the Department of Defense: (1) military tactical training or (2) maintenance, repair, and
removal of targets and munitions associated with military tactical training; or”. The department proposes to
delete the partial exemption for stationary gas turbines used at military training facilities.
Comment #2: Sections 104.1(e) and (f) (Partial Exemptions)
The EPA asks that the County include appropriate limits on the length of emergency condition and
alternative emergency limits for units fired with emergency fuel that are otherwise normally fired with
natural gas.
Response #2: Sections 104.1(e) and (f) (Partial Exemptions)
The department has included source specific limitations on emergency fuel use as allowed by a permit
issued by the Control Officer.
Comment #3: Section 301.3 (Limitations-Particulate Matter-Good Combustion Practices for Turbines)
The EPA asks the County to define the frequency of monitoring required to comply with the provisions of
“good combustion practices” for turbines.
Response #3: Section 301.3 (Limitations-Particulate Matter-Good Combustion Practices for Turbines)
The department has included text regarding the frequency of monitoring temperature differential across the
combustion burners.
Comment #4: Section 304.1(a) (Limitations-Nitrogen Oxides)
During the County workshops discussing Rule 323, APS brought to the County’s attention the dilemma
caused by the inspection requirements related to boilers. APS has installed a Clayton Boiler on its process
equipment. This boiler is a state-of-the-art boiler and as such has a sealed burner chamber which does not
allow for inspection of the combustion chamber, burner or flame pattern as required under Section
304.1(a). Rather than be penalized for having such an advanced and efficient burner that does not allow for
inspection, APS suggested that the County provide an exception to allow APS to operate the burner in
compliance with the manufacturer’s recommended procedures. At the time of the workshops, the County
was open to the suggestion and offered no indication that it would not approve such a solution. APS hopes
this was an oversight on the County’s part, but if the County should need additional information, please let
APS know and APS will be happy to provide it.
Response #4: Section 304 (Limitations-Nitrogen Oxides)
The department proposes to include new text before the last sentence “for low emission burner systems that
do not provide accessibility for combustion chamber inspection, burner inspection, or inspection of the
flame pattern, an owner or operator shall provide documentation from the manufacturer and follow
manufacture’s recommended procedure”.
Comment #5: Section 306.1 (Requirements for Air Pollution Control Equipment and ECS Monitoring
Equipment-Emission Control System)
A facility may comply with the emission limits in the rule by installing and operating an emission control
system (ECS). While an ECS may be one possible way to meeting emission limits, it generally cannot
substitute for meeting limits, unless specific control measures or a percent effectiveness are defined as a
part of the required ECS that may be approved by the Control Officer. The definition of ECS at Section 206
also allows discretion to the Control Officer on the types of required control devices, practices, and
monitoring needs for an effective ECS. The EPA asks the County to either define a set of specific required
control technologies or practices that must be a part of any effective ECS or define a required emissions
reduction (for example, 80% reduction of existing NOx emissions).
Response #5: Section 306.1 (Requirements for Air Pollution Control Equipment and ECS Monitoring
Equipment-Emission Control System)
The department proposes to include at the end-of the sentence in Section 306.1 new text “or a combustion
control system which reduces emissions to below the applicable standards in Section 300 of this rule”.

Comment #6: Section 503.1(a) (Compliance Determination-Ultra Low Sulfur Diesel Verification)
This section allows for various documents to verify compliance with the ultra-low sulfur diesel fuel limit.
The EPA asks the County to ensure the documents listed give accurate values and use enforceable test
methods. For example, EPA generally has not approved the use of Safety Data Sheets (SDS)/Material
Safety Data Sheets (MSDS) to determine compliance in SIP rules unless the SDS/MSDS specifies that the
compound of interest was determined by an approved EPA method.
Response #6: Section 503.1(a) (Compliance Determination-Ultra Low Sulfur Diesel Verification)
The department proposes to remove Safety Data Sheets (SDS)/Material Safety Data Sheets (MSDS) from
the list of documentation of the sulfur content of the fuel oil in Section 503.1(a)(4).
Comment #7: Section 503.2(a) (Compliance Determination-Gaseous Emissions-Source Test)
This section states that no compliance determinations will be made during startup and shutdown. This does
not align with EPA’s startup, shutdown, and malfunction (SSM) policy, particularly in the case of CEMS-
equipped units. The EPA asks the County to include alternative numerical limits for operations during these
periods, require best operating practices, or require that units comply with the standard limits during SSM
events.
Response #7: Section 503.2(a) (Compliance Determination-Gaseous Emissions-Source Test)
The department has removed text regarding compliance determinations during startup and shutdown.
Comment #8: Section 503.3 (Compliance Determination-Gaseous Emissions-Continuous Emission
Monitoring System (CEMS))
This section states that no compliance determinations will be made during startup and shutdown. This does
not align with EPA’s startup, shutdown, and malfunction (SSM) policy, particularly in the case of CEMS-
equipped units. The EPA asks the County to include alternative numerical limits for operations during these
periods, require best operating practices, or require that units comply with the standard limits during SSM
events.
Response #8: Section 503.3 (Compliance Determination-Gaseous Emissions-Continuous Emission
Monitoring System (CEMS))
The department has removed text regarding compliance determinations during startup and shutdown.
Comment #9: Section 504 (Compliance Determination-Test Methods Incorporated By Reference)
Alternative test methods may not be used upon sole approval by the Control Officer. The EPA asks the
County to remove this provision or include language that also requires EPA approval for alternative
methods.
Response #9: Section 504 (Compliance Determination-Test Methods Incorporated By Reference)
The department proposes to delete the provision allowing test methods to be used upon sole approval by the
Control Officer and proposes to add text that allows test methods as approved by the Administrator to be
used.
14. Any other matters prescribed by statute that are applicable to the specific department or to any
specific rule or class of rules:
Not applicable
15. Incorporations by reference and their location in the rule:
The department incorporated by reference sections of the Code of Federal Regulations in Section 504
(Compliance Determination-Test Methods Incorporated by Reference)
16. Was this rule previously an emergency rule?
No
17. Full text of the rule follows:

Return to list of attachments
MARICOPA COUNTY
AIR POLLUTION CONTROL REGULATIONS
REGULATION III – CONTROL OF AIR CONTAMINANTS
RULE 323
FUEL BURNING EQUIPMENT FROM INDUSTRIAL/COMMERCIAL/ INSTITUTIONAL (ICI)
SOURCES
INDEX
SECTION 100 – GENERAL
101 PURPOSE
102 APPLICABILITY
103 EXEMPTIONS
104 PARTIAL EXEMPTIONS
SECTION 200 – DEFINITIONS
201 ALTERNATIVE FUELS
202 COGENERATION STEAM GENERATING UNIT
203 CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN (CAP)
204 DISTILLATE OIL
205 EMERGENCY FUEL
206 EMISSION CONTROL SYSTEM (ECS)
207 FOSSIL FUEL
208 HEAT INPUT
209 LOW SULFUR OIL
210 209 NATURAL GAS CURTAILMENT
211 210 OPACITY
212 211 PARTICULATE MATTER EMISSIONS
213 212 PEAK LOAD
214 213 PROCESS HEATER
215 214 RATED HEAT INPUT CAPACITY
216 215 REGENERATIVE CYCLE GAS TURBINE
217 216 RESIDUAL OIL
218 217 SIMPLE CYCLE GAS TURBINE
219 218 STATIONARY GAS TURBINE
219 STEADY STATE
220 220 STEAM GENERATING UNIT
221 221 SULFUR OXIDES (SOX)
222 ULTRA LOW SULFUR DIESEL
222 223 UNCOMBINED WATER

223 224 WASTE DERIVED FUEL GAS
224 225 WATER HEATER
SECTION 300 – STANDARDS
301 LIMITATIONS - PARTICULATE MATTER
302 LIMITATIONS - OPACITY
303 LIMITATIONS -SULFUR IN FUEL
304 LIMITATIONS -NITROGEN OXIDES
305 LIMITATIONS - CARBON MONOXIDE
306 REQUIREMENTS FOR AIR POLLUTION CONTROL EQUIPMENT AND ECS
MONITORING EQUIPMENT
SECTION 400 – ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS (NOT APPLICABLE)
401 COMPLIANCE SCHEDULE
SECTION 500 – MONITORING AND RECORDS
501 RECORDKEEPING AND REPORTING
502 RECORDS RETENTION
503 COMPLIANCE DETERMINATION
504 TEST METHODS ADOPTED BY REFERENCE COMPLIANCE DETERMINATION-TEST
METHODS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE
Adopted 07/03/05
Revised 10/17/07
Adopted 07/02/2003; Revised 10/17/2007; Revised MM/DD/YYYY
MARICOPA COUNTY
AIR POLLUTION CONTROL REGULATIONS
REGULATION III-CONTROL OF AIR CONTAMINANTS
RULE 323
FUEL BURNING EQUIPMENT FROM INDUSTRIAL/COMMERCIAL/INSTITUTIONAL (ICI) SOURCES
INDEX
SECTION 100 – GENERAL
101 PURPOSE: To limit the discharge of nitrogen oxides, sulfur oxides, carbon monoxide, and particulate
matter emissions into the atmosphere from fuel burning combustion equipment at industrial and/or
commercial and/or institutional (ICI) sources.
102 APPLICABILITY: This rule applies to any of the following types of ICI combustion equipment that
burns either fossil fuels or alternative fuels:
102.1 Each steam generating unit that has a maximum design rated heat input capacity from fuels
combusted in the generating unit of greater than 10 million (MM) Btu/hr (2.9 Megawatts (MW)).
102.2 Each stationary gas turbine with a heat input at peak load equal to or greater than 2.9 megawatts
(MW).
102.3 Each cogeneration steam generating unit with a heat input of greater than 10 MMBtu/hr.
102.4 Each indirect-fired process heater with a heat input greater than 10 MMBtu/hr.

102.5 NSPS & NESHAP: In addition to this rule, facilities may be subject to New Source Performance
Standards (NSPS) in Rule 360 and/or National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants
(NESHAP) in Rule 370 of these rules.
103 EXEMPTIONS: This rule shall not apply to the following types of equipment:
103.1 Incinerators, crematories, or burn-off ovens; or
103.2 Dryers, cement and lime kilns; or
103.3 Direct-fired process heaters; or
103.4 Medical waste incinerators; or
103.5 Reciprocating internal combustion equipment; or
103.6 Combustion equipment used in power plant operations for the purpose of supplying greater than
one third of the electricity to any utility power distribution system for sale; or
103.7 Combustion equipment associated with nuclear power plant operations; or
103.8 Water heaters used for the sole purpose of heating hot water for comfort or for radiant heat.
104 PARTIAL EXEMPTIONS:
104.1 Stationary gas turbines listed in subsection 102.2 Section 102.2 of this rule that are used for any
of the following reasons shall be exempt from Sections 304, 305 and subsections 301.1, 301.2,
501.1 and 501.3 Sections 301.1, 301.2, 304, 305, 501.1, and 501.3 of this rule:
a. Used for firefighting; or
b. Used for flood control; or
c. Used at military training facilities other than a garrison facility; or
d. c. Engaged by manufacturers in research and the development of equipment for either gas
turbine emission control techniques or gas turbine efficiency improvements; or
e. d. Fired with emergency fuel that is normally fired with natural gas, or
f. e. Testing, reliability, maintenance, training, and readiness purposes for a total of 36 hours per
year per unit when firing any emergency fuel. Fired with emergency fuel for 36 cumulative
hours per year or less, per unit for testing, reliability, training, and maintenance purposes as
allowed by a permit issued by the Control Officer for that source.
104.2 All steam generating units including cogeneration units and process heaters that are used for any
of the following reasons as allowed by a permit issued by the Control Officer shall be exempt
from Sections 301, 304, 305, and subsections 501.1 and 501.3 of this rule:
a. Fired with an emergency fuel that is normally fired with natural gas; or
b. Firing any emergency fuel for testing, reliability, and maintenance purposes up to a maximum
total of 36 hrs. per unit per year. for 36 cumulative hours per year, per unit or less.
SECTION 200 – DEFINITIONS: For the purpose of this rule, the following definitions shall apply. See Rule 100
(General Provisions and Definitions) of these rules for definitions of terms that are used but not specifically defined
in this rule. For the purpose of this rule, the following definitions shall apply, in addition to those definitions found in
Rule 100 (General Provisions and Definitions) of these rules. In the event of any inconsistency between any of the
Maricopa County air pollution control rules, the definitions in this rule take precedence.
201 ALTERNATIVE FUELS: Substitutes for traditional oil-derived and fossil-fuel derived motor vehicle
fuels including but not limited to biodiesel, propane, ethanol or methanol.
202 COGENERATION STEAM GENERATING UNIT: A steam or hot water generating unit that
simultaneously produces both electrical (or mechanical) and thermal energy (such as heat or steam) from
the same primary energy source.

203 CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN (CAP): A methodical procedure that is used to evaluate and correct a
turbine operational problem and that includes, at a minimum, improved preventative maintenance
procedures, improved ECS operating practices, possible operational amendments, and progress reports.
204 DISTILLATE OIL: A petroleum fraction of fuel oil produced by distillation that complies with the
specifications for fuel oil numbers 1 or 2, as defined by the American Society for Testing and Materials in
ASTM D396-01, “Standard Specification for Fuel Oils.”
205 EMERGENCY FUEL: Fuel fired by a gas combustion unit, normally fueled by natural gas, only during
circumstances of unforeseen disruption or interruption in the supply of natural gas to a unit that normally
runs on natural gas. The inability to burn natural gas may be one of the following, but is not limited to,
natural gas emergency, natural gas curtailment, or a breakdown of the delivery system.
206 EMISSION CONTROL SYSTEM (ECS): A system approved in writing by the Control Officer,
designed and operated in accordance with good engineering practice to reduce emissions.
207 FOSSIL FUEL: Naturally occurring carbonaceous substances from the ground such as natural gas,
petroleum, coal, and any form of solid, liquid or gaseous fuel derived from such material for the purpose of
creating energy.
208 HEAT INPUT: Heat derived from the combustion of fuel not including the heat input from preheated
combustion air, recirculated flue gases, or exhaust gases from other sources, such as gas turbines, internal
combustion engines, and kilns.
209 LOW SULFUR OIL: Fuel oil containing less than or equal to 0.05 % by weight of sulfur.
210 209 NATURAL GAS CURTAILMENT: A shortage in the supply of natural gas, due solely to limitations or
restrictions in distribution pipelines by the utility supplying the gas and not due to the cost of natural gas.
211 210 OPACITY: A condition of the ambient air, or any part thereof, in which an air contaminant partially or
wholly obscures the view of an observer.
212 211 PARTICULATE MATTER EMISSIONS: Any and all particulate matter emitted to the ambient air as
measured by applicable state and federal test methods.
213 212 PEAK LOAD: 100% of the manufacturer’s design capacity of a gas turbine at 288° Kelvin, 60% relative
humidity, and 101.3 kilopascals pressure (ISO standard day conditions).
214 213 PROCESS HEATER: An enclosed combustion device that uses controlled flame to transfer heat to a
process fluid or a process material that is not a fluid or to heat transfer material for use in a process unit
(not including the generation of steam). A process heater may be either indirect or direct-fired, dependent
upon whether the gases of combustion mix with and exhaust to the same stack or vent (direct-fired) with
gases emanating from the process material or not (indirect-fired). Emissions from indirect-fired units
consist entirely of products of combustion while emissions from direct-fired units are unique to the given
process and may vary widely in any industrial process. A process heater is not an oven or kiln used for
drying, curing, baking, cooking, calcining, or vitrifying.
215 214 RATED HEAT INPUT CAPACITY: The heat input capacity in million Btu/hr. as specified on the
nameplate of the combustion unit. If the combustion unit has been altered or modified so that its maximum
heat input is different than the heat input capacity on the nameplate (design heat capacity), the maximum
heat input shall be considered as the rated heat input capacity.
216 215 REGENERATIVE CYCLE GAS TURBINE: Any stationary gas turbine that recovers thermal energy
from the exhaust gases and utilizes the thermal energy to preheat air prior to entering the combustor unit.
217 216 RESIDUAL OIL: The heavier oils that remain after the distillate oils and lighter hydrocarbons are distilled
off in refinery operations. This includes crude oil or fuel oil numbers 1 and 2 that have a nitrogen content
greater than 0.05% by weight, and all fuel oil numbers 4, 5 and 6, as defined by the American Society of
Testing and Materials in ASTM D396-01, “Standard Specifications for Fuel Oils”.
218 217 SIMPLE CYCLE GAS TURBINE: Any stationary gas turbine that does not recover heat from the gas
turbine exhaust gases to preheat the inlet combustion air to the gas turbine, or that does not recover heat
from the gas turbine exhaust gases to heat water or generate steam.

219 218 STATIONARY GAS TURBINE: Any simple cycle gas turbine or regenerative gas turbine that is not self-
propelled or that is attached to a foundation.
219 STEADY STATE: A safe, stable megawatt load at which a unit with equipment in normal operating
conditions is capable of being held for an extended period of time, without creating an unsafe or unstable
operating condition.
220 220 STEAM GENERATING UNIT: An external combustion unit or boiler fired by fossil fuel that is used to
generate hot water or steam. The hot water or steam is then used as energy for driving another process or
piece of equipment.
221 221 SULFUR OXIDES (SOX): The sum of the oxides of sulfur emitted from the flue gas from a combustion
unit that are directly dependent upon the amount of sulfur in the fuel used.
222 ULTRA LOW SULFUR DIESEL: Fuel oil containing less than or equal to 0.0015 % sulfur by weight.
222 223 UNCOMBINED WATER: Condensed water containing no more than analytical trace amounts of other
chemical elements or compounds.
223 224 WASTE DERIVED FUEL GAS: Any A gaseous fuel that is generated from the biodegradation of solid
or liquid waste including, but not limited to, sewage sludge, digester gas and landfill gas.
224 225 WATER HEATER: A closed vessel in which water is heated by combustion of fuel and water is either
withdrawn for use external to the vessel (at pressures not exceeding 160 psi with all controls and devices
preventing water temperatures from exceeding 210°F) or used for radiant heat. Water heaters are usually no
larger than 1 MM Btu/hr as opposed to boilers, do not reach temperatures of 220°F and higher that boilers
can reach, and are not manufactured to meet boiler codes.
SECTION 300 – STANDARDS
301 LIMITATIONS – PARTICULATE MATTER:
301.1 Limitation-Liquid Fuels: An owner or operator shall not discharge, cause or allow the discharge
of particulate matter emissions, caused by combustion of non-gaseous liquid fuels or a blend of
liquid fuels with other fuels in excess of 0.10 lbs. per MMBtu, during steady state operations, from
any combustion units listed in subsections 102.1, 102.3 and 102.4 Sections 102.1, 102.3, and
102.4 of this rule with either a rated heat input capacity or heat input of greater than 100 MM
Btu/hr.
301.2 Particulate Matter Testing: A backhalf analysis shall be performed, using Reference Method
202 referenced in subsection 504.6 Section 504.6 of this rule, each time a compliance test for
particulate matter emissions to meet the standards in subsection 301.1 Section 301.1 of this rule is
performed using Method 5. (The results of the Method 202 testing shall be used for emissions
inventory purposes).
301.3 Good Combustion Practices for Turbines: During steady state operations, Anan owner or
operator of a stationary gas turbine listed in subsection 102.2 Section 102.2 of this rule, regardless
of fuel type or size, shall use operational practices recommended by the manufacturer and
parametric monitoring that ensure good combustion control. One of the following procedures may
be used:
a. Monitor the maximum temperature differential across the combustion burners or at locations
around the back end of the turbine, dependent upon the particular unit, to ensure no more than
a 100° F difference using a thermocouple. Differential temperatures across the burners to
demonstrate good combustion practices shall be measured from at least one minute data point
during a complete steady state operating hour. If a valid maximum temperature differential of
greater than 100°F is observed across the burners, investigation and corrective action shall be
taken within three hours to reduce the temperature difference to 100°F or less; or
b. If the manufacturer recommends that the maximum numerical temperature differential to
ensure good combustion is a temperature that is greater than 100°F, then proof of this
maximum alternate temperature shall be submitted to the Control Officer. The procedure to

measure the maximum temperature differential listed above in subsection 301.3a Section
301.3(a) of this rule shall then be followed using the alternate recommended maximum
temperature differential after approval by the Control Officer.
c. If a repetitive pattern of failure to meet the proper temperature differential of 100°F or to meet
the alternate temperature differential recommended by the manufacturer indicates that the
turbine is not being operated in a manner consistent with good combustion practices, then the
Control Officer may require the owner or operator to submit a Corrective Action Plan (CAP).
302 LIMITATIONS – OPACITY: No An owner or operator shall not discharge into the ambient air from any
single source of emissions any air contaminant, other than uncombined water, in excess of 20% opacity.
303 LIMITATIONS – SULFUR IN FUEL: An owner or operator of any applicable equipment listed in
Section 102 of this rule that burns liquid fuel oil or a mixture or blend of fuel oil with any other fuels shall
use only low sulfur oil ultra low sulfur diesel. An owner or operator using waste derived fuel gas shall use
only waste derived fuel gas with a sulfur content less than or equal to 800 ppm (0.08%). that contains no
more than 0.08% sulfur by weight, alone or in combination with other fuels.
304 LIMITATIONS – NITROGEN OXIDES:
304.1 An owner or operator of any combustion equipment listed in Section 102 of this rule, except gas
turbines, with a heat input of greater than 10 MMBtu/hr to 100 MMBtu/hr, except gas turbines,
shall comply either with (a) or (b) below Sections 304.1(a) or 304.1(b) of this rule. Gas turbines
are subject to both Sections 304.1(a) and 304.1(b) of this rule below:
a. Establish initial optimal baseline concentrations for NOx and CO within 90 days of the first
usage of the combustion equipment utilizing the initial design burner specifications or
manufacturer’s recommendations to ensure good combustion practices. Tune the unit annually
in accordance with good combustion practices or a follow the manufacturer’s recommended
procedure, if applicable. , that will include the following at a minimum: For low emission
burner systems that do not provide accessibility for combustion chamber inspection, burner
inspection, or inspection of the flame pattern, an owner or operator shall provide
documentation from the manufacturer and follow manufacturer’s recommended procedure. If
using good combustion practices, the owner or operator shall include the following at a
minimum:
(1) Inspect the burner system and clean and replace any components of the burner as
necessary to minimize emissions of NOx and CO; and
(2) Inspect the burner chamber for areas of impingement and remove if necessary; and
(3) Inspect the flame pattern and make adjustments as necessary to optimize the flame
pattern; and
(4) Inspect the system controlling the air-to-fuel ratio and ensure that it is correctly calibrated
and functioning properly; and
(5) Measure the NOx and the CO concentration of the effluent stream after each adjustment
was made with a handheld portable monitor to ensure optimal baseline concentrations are
maintained. or
b. Limit nitrogen oxide emissions to no more than the following amounts:
(1) 155 ppm 42 ppmdv calculated as nitrogen dioxide, when burning gaseous fuel. During
steady state operations, this test result using EPA Reference Method(s) 7 or other EPA-
approved test method designated by the Control Officer shall be based upon the
arithmetic mean of the results of three test runs. Each test run shall have a minimum
sample run time of one hour.
(2) 230 ppm 65 ppmdv calculated as nitrogen dioxide, when burning liquid fuel. During
steady state operations, this test result using EPA Reference Method(s) 7 or other EPA-
approved test method designated by the Control Officer shall be based upon the

arithmetic mean of the results of three test runs. Each test run shall have a minimum
sample run time of one hour.
c. For simple gas turbines, the nitrogen oxides shall be measured dry and corrected to 15%
oxygen, during steady state operations. For all other combustion equipment, the nitrogen
oxides shall be measured dry and corrected to 3% oxygen.
304.2 An owner or operator of any combustion equipment, listed in Section 102 of this rule, with a heat
input greater than 100 MMBtu/hr, shall:
a. Tune the equipment every 6 months with good combustion practices or a manufacturer’s
procedure that at a minimum includes the procedures listed in subsection 304.1a Section
304.1(a) of this rule and;
b. Meet the NOx emission limits as stated in subsection 304.1b Section 304.1(b) of this rule.
305 LIMITATIONS-CARBON MONOXIDE: No An owner or operator of any equipment listed in Section
102 of this rule with a heat input greater than 100 MMBtu/hr shall not cause to be discharged into the
atmosphere, carbon monoxide (CO), measured in excess of 400 ppmv at any time. This During steady state
operations, this test result, using EPA Reference Method 10 or other EPA-approved test method designated
by the Control Officer, shall be based upon the arithmetic mean of the results of three test runs and shall be
measured during steady state compliance source testing. Each test run shall have a minimum sample time
of one hour. For simple gas turbines, the CO shall be measured dry and corrected to 15% oxygen, during
steady state operations. For all other combustion equipment, the CO shall be measured dry and corrected to
3% oxygen.
306 REQUIREMENTS FOR AIR POLLUTION CONTROL EQUIPMENT AND ECS MONITORING
EQUIPMENT:
306.1 Emission Control System Required: For affected operations which may exceed any of the
applicable standards set forth in Sections 300 of this rule, an owner or operator may comply by
installing and operating an emission control system (ECS) or a combustion control system which
reduces emissions to below the applicable standards in Section 300 of this rule.
306.2 Providing and Maintaining ECS Monitoring Devices: No An owner or operator required to use
an approved ECS pursuant to this rule shall not do so without first providing, properly installing,
operating, and maintaining in calibration and in good working order, devices for indicating
temperatures, pressures, transfer rates, rates of flow, or other operating conditions necessary to
determine if air pollution control equipment is functioning properly and is properly maintained as
described in an approved Operation and Maintenance (O&M) Plan.
306.3 Operation and Maintenance (O&M) Plan Required for ECS:
a. General Requirements: An owner or operator shall provide and maintain an O&M Plan for
any ECS, any other emission processing equipment, and any ECS monitoring devices that are
used pursuant to this rule or an air pollution permit.
b. Approval by Control Officer: An owner or operator shall submit to the Control Officer for
approval the O&M Plans of each ECS and each ECS monitoring device that is used pursuant
to this rule.
c. Initial Plans: An owner or operator that is required to have an O&M Plan pursuant to this
rule shall comply with all O&M Plans that the owner or operator has submitted for approval,
but which have not yet been approved, unless notified by the Control Officer in writing. Once
the initial plan has been approved in writing by the Control Officer, an owner or operator shall
comply with this approved plan.
d. Revisions to Plan: If revisions to the initial plan have been approved by the Control Officer
in writing, an owner or operator shall comply with the revisions to the initial plan. If revisions
to the plan have not yet been approved by the Control Officer in writing, then an owner or
operator shall comply with the most recent O&M plan on file at Maricopa County Air Quality
Department.

e. Control Officer Modifications to Plan: After discussion with the owner or operator, the
Control Officer may modify the plan in writing prior to approval of the initial O&M plan. An
owner or operator shall then comply with the plan that has been modified by the Control
Officer.
SECTION 400 – ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS (NOT APPLICABLE)
401 COMPLIANCE SCHEDULE
401.1 O&M Plan: Any owner or operator employing an approved ECS on the effective date of this rule
shall by [date 8 months after rule adoption] file an O&M Plan with the Control Officer in
accordance with Section 306.3 of this rule.
401.2 Modifications to Existing ECS: Any owner or operator required to modify their ECS equipment
or system by either reconstructing or adding on equipment for compliance with this rule shall by
[date 8 months after rule adoption] file a schedule for the modification with the Control Officer.
The plan shall show how the ECS is to be used to achieve full compliance and shall specify dates
for completing increments of progress. Any and all ECS used to achieve such compliance shall be
in operation by [date 24 months after rule adoption].
401.3 ECS Installation: An owner or operator required to install an ECS for compliance with this rule
shall by [date 8 months after rule adoption] file a schedule for the installation with the Control
Officer. The ECS shall then be installed and in compliance by [date 36 months after rule
adoption].
SECTION 500 – MONITORING AND RECORDS
501 RECORDKEEPING AND REPORTING: An owner or operator subject to this rule shall comply with
the requirements set forth in this section. Any records and data required by this section shall be kept on site
at all times in a consistent and complete manner and be made available without delay to the Control Officer
or his designee upon request. Records shall consist of the following information:
501.1 Equipment Listed in Section 102 of this Rule: Type of fuel used, amount of fuel used, and
amount of sulfur in the fuel if using liquid fuel, and the days and hours of operation.
501.2 Emergency Fuel Usage: Monthly records of: type of emergency fuel used, dates and hours of
operation using emergency fuel, and nature of the emergency or purpose for the use of the
emergency fuel as stated in subsections 104.1 and 104.2 Sections 104.1 and 104.2. Yearly records
of the twelve month log of hours of operation in the emergency mode.
501.3 Good Combustion Practice: Measurements of the temperature differential across the burners of
turbines per subsection 301.3 Section 301.3 of this rule, results of evaluation and corrective action
taken to reduce the temperature differential or a finding that the temperature differential returned
to the range listed in subsection 301.3 (a) or (b) Sections 301.3(a) or 301.3(b) of this rule without
any action by the owner or operator.
501.4 Tuning Procedure: Date that the procedure was performed on the particular unit and at a
minimum: stack gas temperature, flame conditions, nature of the adjustment and results of the
nitrogen oxide and carbon monoxide concentrations obtained by using a handheld monitor after
each adjustment.
502 RECORDS RETENTION: Copies of reports, logs and supporting documentation required by the Control
Officer shall be retained for at least 5 years. Records and information required by this rule shall also be
retained for at least 5 years.
503 COMPLIANCE DETERMINATION:
503.1 Low Sulfur Oil Verification Sulfur In Fuel Verification:
a. An owner or operator shall submit fuel oil receipts from the fuel supplier indicating the sulfur
content of the fuel oil or verification that the fuel oil used meets the 0.05% sulfur limit or the
0.08% limit for landfill or digester gas if requested by the Control Officer, or Ultra Low
Sulfur Diesel: If the Control Officer requests documentation of the sulfur content of the fuel

oil to demonstrate the 0.0015% limits, the owner or operator shall submit one of the
following:
(1) Fuel receipts, or
(2) Contract specifications, or
(3) Pipeline meter tickets, or
(4) Fuel supplier information, or
(5) Purchase records, or
(6) Testing of the fuel oil for sulfur content
The items listed above must provide accurate sulfur content values or be based on enforceable
test methods as approved by the Administrator to determine the sulfur content.
b. If fuel receipts are not available, an owner or operator shall submit a statement of certification
or proof of the sulfur content of the fuel oil from the supplier to the Control Officer, or Waste
Derived Fuel Gas: The owner or operator shall submit documentation of the concentration of
the sulfur level of the waste derived fuel gas to the Control Officer upon request. The sulfur
content of gaseous fuels shall be determined by South Coast Air Quality Management District
Method 307-94 Determination of Sulfur in a Gaseous Matrix.
c. An owner or operator may elect to test the fuel oil for sulfur content in lieu of certification
from the fuel supplier or fuel receipts using one of the test methods incorporated by reference
in subsections 504.11, 504.12, 504.14 or 504.15.
503.2 Gaseous Emissions-Source Test: Boilers with a heat input capacity of 10 MMBtu 100 MMBtu
per hour or greater, must conduct all applicable performance (stack) tests on a triennial basis.
Triennial performance tests must be completed no more than 37 months after the previous
performance test.
503.3 Gaseous Emissions-Continuous Emission Monitoring System (CEMS): Compliance with the
emission requirements specified in Sections 301 through 304 of this rule may also be determined
using CEMS. Where the unit(s) are equipped with CEMS:
a. General: All CEMS must be installed according to the procedures specified in 40 CFR
60.13(g). All CEMS shall be installed such that a representative measurement of emissions is
obtained. Additional procedures for the location of CEMS found in 40 CFR 60, Appendix B
shall be used. The data recorder for CEMS shall be in operation at all times the unit is
operated.
b. Cycle Time: An owner or operator of any unit using a CEMS shall ensure that the CEMS
completes a minimum of one cycle of operation (sampling, analyzing, and data recording) for
each successive 15 minute period.
c. Calibration: Zero and span shall be checked once every 24 hours. The CEMS shall be
calibrated in accordance with the manufacturer's specifications.
d. Averaging: The data recorded during periods of calibration checks, zero and span
adjustments shall not be included in averaging for compliance determinations. Compliance
shall be determined on an hourly basis using the average of the 3 previous 1 hour average
emissions concentrations. The 1-hour average emissions concentration shall be determined
from at least two data points recorded by the CEMS.
e. Accuracy Testing: Accuracy testing of CEMS shall be conducted using a relative accuracy
test audit pursuant to 40 CFR 60, Appendix F.
504 TEST METHODS ADOPTED BY REFERENCE COMPLIANCE DETERMINATION-TEST
METHODS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE: The following test methods are approved for use for
the purpose of determining compliance with this rule. The test methods The EPA test methods as they exist
in the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) (July 1, 2004), as listed below, are incorporated by reference in

Appendix G of the Maricopa County Air Pollution Control Regulations. Alternative test methods as
approved by the Administrator or other EPA-approved test methods may be used upon written approval
from the Control Officer. When more than one test method is permitted for the same determination, an
exceedance under any method will constitute a violation. Copies of test methods referenced in this section
are available at the Maricopa County Air Quality Department, 1001 N. Central Avenue, Suite 125,
Phoenix, AZ 85004-1942. When more than one test method, as listed in subsections 504.11, 504.12,
504.14, or 504.15 of this rule, is permitted for the same determination, an exceedance of the limits
established in this rule determined by any one of the applicable test methods constitutes a violation.
504.1 EPA Reference Methods 1 (“Sample and Velocity Traverses for Stationary Sources”), and 1 A
(“Sample and Velocity Traverses for Stationary Sources with Small Stacks and Ducts”) (40 CFR
60, Appendix A).
504.2 EPA Reference Methods 2 (“Determination of Stack Gas Velocity and Volumetric Flow Rate”),
2A (“Direct Measurement of Gas Volume Through Pipes and Small Ducts”), 2C (“Determination
of Stack Gas Velocity and Volumetric Flow Rate in Small Stacks or Ducts”), and 2D
(“Measurement of Gas Volumetric Flow Rates in Small Pipes and Ducts”) (40 CFR 60, Appendix
A).
504.3 EPA Reference Methods 3 (“Gas Analysis for the Determination of Dry Molecular Weight”), 3A
(“Determination of Oxygen and Carbon Dioxide Concentrations in Emissions from Stationary
Sources (Instrumental Analyzer Procedure)”), 3B (“Gas Analysis for the Determination of
Emission Rate Correction Factor of Excess Air”), and 3C (“Determination of Carbon Dioxide,
Methane, Nitrogen and Oxygen from Stationary Sources”) (40 CFR 60, Appendix A).
504.4 EPA Reference Method 4 (“Determination of Moisture Content in Stack Gases”) (40 CFR 60,
Appendix A).
504.5 EPA Reference Method 5 (“Determination of Particulate Emissions from Stationary Sources”) (40
CFR 60, Appendix A)
504.6 EPA Reference Method 202 (“Determination of Condensable Particulate Emissions from
Stationary Sources”) (40 CFR 51, Appendix M).
504.7 EPA Reference Methods 7 (“Determination of Nitrogen Oxide Emissions from Stationary
Sources”), 7A (“Determination of Nitrogen Oxide Emissions form Stationary Sources”), 7B
(“Determination of Nitrogen Oxide Emissions from Stationary Sources – Ultraviolet
Spectrometry”), 7C (“Determination of Nitrogen Oxide Emissions from Stationary Sources –
Alkaline-Permanganate Colorimetric Method”), 7D (“Determination of Nitrogen Oxide Emissions
from Stationary Sources – Alkaline – Permanganate Chromatographic Method”), and 7E
(“Determination of Nitrogen Oxide Emissions from Stationary Sources – Instrumental Analyzer
Method“), (40 CFR 60, Appendix A).
504.8 EPA Reference Method 9, (“Visual Determination of the Opacity of Emissions from Stationary
Sources”) (40 CFR 60, Appendix A).
504.9 EPA Reference Method 10, (“Determination of Carbon Monoxide from Stationary Sources”) (40
CFR 60, Appendix A).
504.10 EPA Reference Method 20, (“Determination of Nitrogen Oxides, Sulfur Dioxide, and Diluent
Emissions from Stationary Gas Turbines”) (40 CFR 60, Appendix A).
504.11 American Society of Testing Materials, ASTM Method D2622-92 or D2622-98, (“Standard Test
Method for Sulfur in Petroleum Products by Wavelength Dispersive X-Ray Fluorescence
Spectrometry”), 1992 or 1998.
504.12 American Society of Testing Materials, ASTM Method D1266-98, (“Standard Test Method for
Sulfur in Petroleum Products (Lamp Method)”), 1998.
504.13 504.12 American Society of Testing Materials, ASTM Method D2880-00 D2880-96, (“Standard
Specification for Gas Turbine Fuel Oils”), 2000

504.14 504.13 American Society of Testing Materials, ASTM Method D4294-90 or 98 D4294-02 or D4294-03,
(“Standard Test Method for Sulfur in Petroleum and Petroleum Products by Energy- Dispersive X-
ray Fluorescence Spectrometry”), 1990 or 1998.
504.15 504.14 American Society of Testing Materials, ASTM Method D5504-01 or D5504-08,(“Standard Test
Method for Determination of Sulfur compounds in Natural Gas and Gaseous Fuels by Gas
Chromatography and Chemiluminescence”), 2006.
504.15 South Coast Air Quality Management District Method 307-94 Determination of Sulfur in a
Gaseous Matrix

Return to list of attachments
MARICOPA COUNTY BOARD OF HEALTH MEETING MINUTES
Monday, April 25, 2016
301 W. Jefferson Street, 10th Floor
Phoenix, Arizona 85003
Board of Supervisors Conference Room
President Kip Steill called the meeting to order at 3:09 p.m.
ROLL CALL:
Members Present: Members Excused:
Don Cassano Scott Somers
Nedra Halley Francisca Montoya
Andrew Kunasek
Debra Baldauff
Kip Steill
Don Hughes
Robert MacMillan
Michael Mills, M.D. (via phone)
Ex-Officio: Bob England, M.D.
CALL TO THE PUBLIC:
Mr. Kip Steill announced it was time for a call to the public and requested public comment forms
for those who wanted to speak or who wanted to address any action items.
Supervisor Kunasek introduced the newest Board of Health member, Mr. MacMillan.
DISCUSSION/ACTION ITEMS
1. Election of Board of Health Vice President:
Mr. Don Hughes was nominated as Vice President of the Board of Health. A motion was made by
Mr. Don Cassano and seconded by Ms. Nedra Halley and all were in favor. The motion passed
unanimously.
2. Approval of Minutes: President Steill asked for a motion to approve the minutes from the BOH
Meeting held on January 25, 2016. Motion was made by Ms. Nedra Halley to approve the BOH
minutes as presented. Motion was seconded by Mr. Don Cassano and the motion passed
unanimously.
3. Approval of Public Health FY 17 OMB Budget Recommendation Mr. Scot Pitcairn
The Board of Health Finance Committee recommended that the Board of Health approve Public
Health’s FY 17 OMB Budget Recommendation. Mr. Pitcairn was available to answer any questions
that the Board of Health had. Motion was made by Mr. Don Hughes to approve Public Health’s FY
17 OMB budget recommendation. Motion was seconded by Mr. Don Cassano and the motion
passed unanimously.
4. Approval of Environmental Services FY 17 OMB Budget Recommendation Ms. Diane Cabanillas
The Board of Health Finance Committee recommended that the Board of Health approve
Environmental Services’ FY 17 OMB Budget Recommendation. Ms. Cabanillas was available to
answer any questions that the Board of Health had. Motion was made by Mr. Don Hughes to
1

approve Environmental Services FY 17 OMB budget recommendation. Motion was seconded by Mr.
Halley and the motion passed unanimously.
5. Approval of the initiation of regulatory change for the ozone-related Mr. Philip A. McNeely
rulemakings
The rules being revised regarding ozone are the following:
Rule 241: Minor New Source Review
Rule 322: Power Plant Operations
Rule 323: Fuel Burning Equipment from Industrial/Commercial/Institutional Sources
Rule 324: Stationary Internal Combustion (IC) Engines
Rule 336: Surface Coating Operations
Rule 342: Coating Wood Furniture and Fixtures
Rule 350: Storage of Organic Liquids at Bulk Plants and Terminals
Rule 351: Loading of Organic Liquids
Rule 352: Gasoline Delivery Vessel Testing and Use
Rule 353: Gasoline In Stationary Dispensing Tanks
These rules are being closed for public comment and will be published May 13th. If there is no
further comment, the rules will go to the Board of Supervisors for a hearing. These rules are in
regards to non-attainment for the ozone standards. These rules are due to the EPA January 1, 2017
and have gone through the EROP/stakeholder meeting process. Every facility that has a permit will
receive information when rule changes are occurring via email. For more information on the
regulatory process: http://www.maricopa.gov/regulations/default.aspx
Motion was made by Mr. Don Cassano to approve the initiation of regulatory change for the
ozone-related rulemakings. Motion was seconded by Ms. Nedra Halley and the motion passed
unanimously.
6. Fee Waiver Applications Mr. Ken Conklin
Mr. Ken Conklin presented thirty-two (32) fee waivers for review and consideration of approval. A
summary sheet document was provided.
Motion to approve the 32 Fee Waiver applications was made by Ms. Nedra Halley, seconded by
Mr. Don Cassano and all were in favor. Motion passed unanimously.
Discussion Items:
1. Public Health Report: Dr. Bob England
i. Human Resources
ii. Communication
iii. Infrastructure
iv. Strategic Planning
v. Programs
vi. Disease Update
vii. Future Topics
Dr. Bob provided the Board of Health with the updated Public Health org chart. The re-org has
aligned MCDPH into programmatic divisions. Previously, MCDPH was organized by funding stream.
Dr. Bob briefed the board on funding cuts that the department is receiving, including a $300,000
cut to WIC and $230,000 cut to the Office of Preparedness and Response (CDC is pulling some
money back for the Zika response). WIC is struggling to meet a target number of clients but each
time the program doesn’t meet the target, the number of target clients and funding is decreased.
The reason for difficulties with reaching the target number of client is that client encounter has
2

become increasingly more complex. The Office of Vital Records is moving their St. Mary’s Food
Bank location to a location near the 1-17 and Dunlap. MCDPH is no longer tracking returning
travelers from ebola stricken countries. Arizona has experienced the highest level of severity in the
country for flu for hospitalization and death rates. CDC is gathering data but there may not be
enough lab evidence to determine a cause. Zika virus is another of the flaviviruses that is associated
with significant neurological defects in infants whose mothers were infected with the virus in the
first two trimesters of pregnancy. The primary vector is Aedes Aegypti mosquitos. In Maricopa
County, there is no endemic spread of zika; only one travel associated case. The strategy when
there is a travel associated case is to have the individual stay inside, wear repellant, and when
necessary, have Environmental Services do traps and remediation depending on consent. There is
concern regarding the process and timeline it would take to enter private property if necessary to
spray for this type of mosquito. The Surgeon General will be visiting Arizona in May to do a tour on
opioid use. The NACCHO Annual meeting will be July 19 – 21 in Phoenix.
ANNOUNCEMENTS AND CURRENT EVENTS
 Next meeting is July 25, 2016
ADJOURNMENT: There being no further business, motion to adjourn the meeting was made by Mr.
Don Cassano, seconded by Ms. Halley and motion was passed unanimously. The meeting was
adjourned at 4:27 p.m.
3

Copies of all written and electronic Stakeholder input
Return to list of attachments
Michelle Mada - AQDX
From: Hether Krause - AQDX
Sent: Monday, June 06, 2016 8:11 AM
To: Johanna Kuspert - AQDX
Subject: Fwd: Regulatory Outreach
Sent from my iPhone
Begin forwarded message:
From: Jennifer Pokorski - FCDX <jmp@mail.maricopa.gov>
Date: June 6, 2016 at 7:44:46 AM MST
To: Hether Krause - AQDX <HetherKrause@mail.maricopa.gov>
Cc: Lynne Hilliard - MCDOTX <lynnehilliard@mail.maricopa.gov>
Subject: FW: Regulatory Outreach
From: Regulatory [mailto:regulations@mail.maricopa.gov]
Sent: Saturday, June 04, 2016 1:51 PM
To: Hether Krause - ENVX; Valerie Beckett - PLANDEVX; Jennifer Pokorski - FCDX
Subject: FW: Regulatory Outreach
-------------------------------------------
From: michael.denby@aps.com[SMTP:MICHAEL.DENBY@APS.COM]
Sent: Saturday, June 04, 2016 1:50:57 PM
To: Regulatory
Subject: Regulatory Outreach
Auto forwarded by a Rule
Citizen Comments
Issue: AQ-2015-002 Rule 322 Power Plant Operations
Citizen's Name: michael denby
Organization: APS
City: Phoenix
Zip: 85004
Phone Number: 6022502870
Phone Type:
Email: michael.denby@aps.com
Does citizen want to be contacted:
Comment is regarding: express support
Comments:
APS has submitted comments on both Rule 322 and Rule 323 in one document. Those comments were
1

submitted as an email attachment after clicking the hyperlink below. Please let me know if you did not
receive the attached document. Sincerely, Michael Denby, APS
Time of Request: 6/4/2016 1:50:57 PM
2

Michael Denby PO Box 53999 Telephone: 602-250-2870
Environmental Policy & Programs Mail Station 9303 Fax: 602-250-3005
Phoenix, AZ 85072-3999 e-mail: Michael.denby@aps.com
June 4, 2016 Electronically submitted
Philip McNeely, Director
Maricopa County Air Quality Department
1001 N. Central Avenue
Phoenix, AZ 85004
Re: Arizona Public Service Company Comments on Notice of Proposed Rulemaking,
Maricopa County Air Pollution Control Regulations, Rule 322- Power Plant
Operations and Rule 323 Fuel Burning Equipment from
industrial/Commercial/Institutional (ICI) Sources
Dear Director McNeely:
The Arizona Public Service Company (“APS”) appreciates the opportunity to submit
comments on the Maricopa County Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, Rule 322- Power Plant
Operations, and Rule 323 Fuel Burning Equipment from Industrial/Commercial/Institutional
(ICI) Sources (“Proposed Rules”).
As one of the Southwest’s largest electric utilities, APS operates a fleet of power
generating facilities to serve the needs of over one million customers in 11 of Arizona’s 15
counties. The APS fleet includes two coal-fired power plants, six natural gas-fired power plants,
and the nation’s largest nuclear power plant, the Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Station. APS is
a leader in renewable energy with over 1.2 gigawatts of renewable energy. Additionally, 47% of
the electricity we provide comes from carbon-free resources. APS owns and operates three fossil
fuel fired power plants within Maricopa County which will be directly impacted by the Proposed
Rulemakings. Accordingly, APS has a significant interest in the Proposed Rulemakings and
through these comments hopes to help the County draft better more workable rules.
1

APS would like to thank the Maricopa County Air Quality Department rule development
team for its community outreach and stakeholder workshops related to all the rulemakings
triggered by the recent reclassification of Maricopa County from marginal to moderate non-
attainment for ozone. This has been a complex process with many different stakeholders and
some rigid deadlines. APS very much appreciates the County personnel who have worked
tirelessly to make the process as inclusive and informative as possible. To that end, APS feels
that Rule 322 and 323 are well drafted proposed rules. In the interests of improving the
functionality and applicability of the proposed rules, APS offers the following comments.
RULE 322 Power Plant Operations
I. Index
In the index of the Proposed Rule there appear to be two sections that are not consistent with
the text of the rule. The following changes would help align both.
The amended rule language would look as follows:
307 REQUIREMENTS FOR AIR POLLUTION CONTROL EQUIPMENT AND ECS
MONITORING EQUIPMENT
504 COMPLIANCE DETERMINATIONS - TEST METHODS INCORPORATED BY
REFERENCE
II. Section 104.4 Partial Exemptions
For units that operate at a low capacity factor (10% or less), the County has proposed a de
minimis partial exemption. This partial exemption makes sense and works for several APS units
that operate at low levels. However, between the final stakeholder workshop and the Proposed
Rulemaking, the County added a counterintuitive requirement that an exempt unit would
somehow need to operate under a specific permit limit. Upon reflection, we hope that the
County can see the troubles caused by this position. The purpose of Section 104.4 is to provide a
partial exemption from the requirements of Sections 305, 306, 307.4 and 400 for units that
operate at a low capacity factor. If the 10% is linked to an actual permit limit, then it would be
the equivalent of a case-by-case determination under 305.1 defeating the very purpose of this de
minimis exemption. Any unit operating under a Section 104.4 partial exemption is still required
to keep records. If the unit exceeds the 10% threshold, this exemption no longer applies. At that
time the unit would then no longer be excluded from Section 305 and would need to meet RACT
through installation of control equipment or seek a case-by-case determination under Section
305.1 which would result in a permit limit. Accordingly, limiting this de minimis exemption by
requiring a permit limit defeats the purpose of the partial exemption.
2

To resolve this issue, APS recommends that the County remove the phrase “and that is
or will be incorporated in a permit issued by the Control Officer for that source” from the
sentence.
Additionally, in order for Section 104.4 to work as intended, it is necessary to add
Section 400 to the list of sections from which the unit is partially exempt. Since a unit operating
at less than 10% would be exempt from RACT compliance, this partial exemption needs to
exempt the unit from the requirements of Section 400. Once a unit exceeds the 10% threshold, it
would need to meet the requirements of Section 400, but not until then.
To resolve this issue, APS recommends that the County add “and 400” to the sentence.
The amended rule language would look as follows:
104.4 Any equipment listed in Section 102 of this rule that operates less than or equal to 10
percent annual capacity factor per calendar year and that is or will be incorporated in a permit
issued by the Control Officer for that source, is exempt from Sections 305, 306, and 307.4, and
400 of this rule.
III. Section 200 Definitions
a. Section 201 Annual Capacity Factor:
The original definition was lacking a relationship to gas turbines. We suggest the
following change to allow it to apply to steam units as well as gas turbines.
The amended rule language would look as follows:
201 ANNUAL CAPACITY FACTOR: The ratio between the actual heat input to a boiler
or process heater from the fuels burned during a calendar year and the potential heat input to the
boiler or process heater had it been operated for 8,760 hours during a year at the maximum
steady state design heat input capacity. or the ratio between the actual electrical output of a
machine or equipment during a calendar year and the potential electrical output of a machine or
equipment had it been operated for 8, 760 hours at full nameplate capacity.
b. Section 237 Thirty (30) Day Rolling Average
The 30 day rolling average equation can be deceptively complex. To help make the
definition as clear as possible, we suggest the following changes.
The amended rule language would look as follows:
237 THIRTY (30) DAY ROLLING AVERAGE: An arithmetic mean or average of all
hourly emission rates for 30 successive combustion equipment operating days and calculated by
a CEMS at the conclusion of each day for the previous 30 operating days every hour.
3

IV. Section 303 Limitations – Opacity
Section 303.2 appears to be related to the issue of fuel switching. The change proposed
by the County seems to confuse the matter by inserting “or” into the sentence in place of “of”. It
would appear that “of” was the correct choice and should not have been changed. To make it
clearer, we would suggest changing “switching fuel” to “fuel switching”, which lines up better
with the final sentence in that section which also uses “fuel switching.”
The amended rule language would look as follows:
303.2 Opacity may exceed the applicable limits established in Section 303.1 of this rule
for up to one hour during the startup or of fuel switching fuels; however, opacity shall not exceed
40% for any six (6) minute averaging period in this one hour period, provided that the Control
Officer finds that the owner or operator has, to the extent practicable, maintained and operated
the source of emissions in a manner consistent with good air pollution control practices for
minimizing emissions. The one hour period shall begin at the moment of startup of fuel
switching.
V. Section 305 Limitations- Nitrogen Oxides (NOx)
As part of the RACT assessment a unit may choose to use a case-by-case RACT analysis.
The County has made provision for the case-by-case RACT analysis within Sections 305.1 and
305.2. Because the case-by-case RACT analysis is separate from the emission limit in Section
305.1 and 305.2, the County correctly sought to exempt the case-by-case RACT analysis from
these sections. However, it is important that the County also exempt the case-by-case RACT
analysis from the requirements of Section 400 (parts 401 and 402) since it will conflict with the
specific permit limit set forth by the case-by-case analysis.
Accordingly, we recommend that the County insert “Section 400” into the exemptions
listed in Section 305.1 and Section 305.2.
The amended rule language would look as follows:
305 LIMITATIONS – NITROGEN OXIDES (NOx): An owner or operator of any
applicable equipment listed in Section 102.1 and 102.2 of this rule shall not cause to be
discharged into the atmosphere nitrogen oxides in excess of the following limits:
305.1 42 ppmdv, calculated as nitrogen dioxide when burning gaseous fossil fuel. During
steady state operations, this test result using EPA Reference Method(s) 7 or other EPA-approved
test method designated by the Control Officer shall be based upon the arithmetic mean of the
results of three test runs. Each test run shall have a minimum sample time of one hour. If CEMS
is used for the compliance demonstration, the compliance demonstration shall be based upon a
30-day rolling average. Any source for which the owner or operator submits to the department a
case-by-case reasonably available control technology analysis that is or will be incorporated in a
permit issued by the Control Officer for that source, is exempt from Sections 305, and 307.4 and
400 of this rule.
305.2 65 ppmdv calculated as nitrogen dioxide when burning liquid fossil fuel. During steady
state operations, this test result using EPA Reference Method(s) 7 or other EPA-approved test
4

method designated by the Control Officer , shall be based upon the arithmetic mean of the results
of three test runs. Each test run shall have a minimum sample time of one hour. If a CEMS is
used for the compliance demonstration, the compliance demonstration shall be based upon a 30-
day rolling average. Any source for which the owner or operator submits to the department a
case-by-case reasonably available control technology analysis that is or will be incorporated in a
permit issued by the Control Officer for that source, is exempt from Sections 305, and 307.4 and
400 of this rule.
VI. Section 306 Limitations - Carbon Monoxide:
The County appears to have misplaced some clarifying language that was offered during
the final workshop. In Section 306, the County incorrectly placed combined cycle gas turbines
in the 3% oxygen correction factor section. The correct location of combined cycle gas turbines
is within the 15% oxygen correction factor section, not the 3% section. This change also lines up
Sections 305.3 and 306 to have consistent factors.
The amended rule language would look as follows:
306 LIMITATIONS - CARBON MONOXIDE: An owner or operator of any
equipment listed in Section 102 of this rule shall not cause to be discharged into the atmosphere
carbon monoxide (CO) measured in excess of 400 ppmv at any time. This During steady state
operations, this test result, using EPA Reference Method 10 or other EPA-approved test method
designated by the Control Officer and performed during steady state compliance source testing,
shall be based upon the arithmetic mean of the results of three test runs. Each test run shall have
a minimum sample time of one hour. The CO concentration shall be measured dry and corrected
to 3% oxygen for electric utility steam generating units, and cogeneration steam generating units,
and combined cycle gas turbines. The CO concentration shall be measured dry and corrected to
15% oxygen for stationary gas turbines and combined cycle gas turbines during steady state
operations.
VII. SECTION 400 - ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS
a. Section 401
Section 400 is the operative section that helps define how the RACT standard will be
implemented by the affected units. There are several disconnects and inconsistencies that should
be addressed to make this section work as intended.
First - it is important to make sure that partially exempt units are not pulled into Section
400. For example, Section 104.4 is a partial exemption as long as the unit maintains a capacity
factor of 10% or less, and should not be required to comply with Section 400. In fact, it would
be inconsistent, if not impossible, to do both.
Second- it is important that any unit which chooses to undertake a case-by-case RACT
analysis under Section 305.1 not be required to also comply with Section 400. That analysis is
outside the scope Section 400. Accordingly, a case-by-case RACT analysis under Section 305.1
should be exempt from Section 400.
5

Third – the proposed rule language in Section 401 states that the owner of a unit “in
compliance with” Section 305 shall submit a Notification of Compliance. It would appear that a
better way to say this is to say “and subject to”, since it will trigger the obligation, rather than
assuming one is already met. In other words, the fact the unit is “subject to” a limit under
Section 305 is the trigger for the obligation, not “compliance with.”
Fourth - relates to the timeframe for submitting a notice. The Proposed Rule sets the
timeframe at 6 months from rule adoption. However, this creates a disconnect for a unit that may
be exempt under Section 104.4 for a year because it ran at a capacity factor of less than 10%. If
that unit in year 2 exceeded the partial exemption capacity factor and needed to comply with
Section 305, there is no way it could submit a notice 6 months from rule adoption. Accordingly,
we think it would read better if the Section said “6 months from becoming subject to Section 305
limits.”
Fifth - is to create a correlation between step 1 – Section 401, and step 2 – Section 402.
If a unit cannot submit a Notification of Compliance, there needs to be an “if-then” response.
We propose the language that says if you cannot comply with Section 401, then go to Section
402. Currently, the two sections are not linked and this creates a disconnect.
The amended rule language would look as follows:
401 IN EXISTENCE AND IN COMPLIANCE: Except as set forth in Section 104.4 and
the case-by-case RACT analysis of Section 305.1 of this rule, T the owner or operator of any
electric utility stationary gas turbine, electric utility steam generating unit or cogeneration steam
generating unit used to generate electric power in existence on [date of rule adoption] and subject
to in compliance with the emission limits in Section 305 of this rule shall submit a Notification
of Compliance [date within 6 months of becoming subject to Section 305 limits rule adoption].
This Notification shall indicate how compliance with the NOx limits has been determined and if
performance testing is required to demonstrate compliance. If performance testing is required to
demonstrate compliance, the Notification shall include a timeline for the test. Performance test
results from a past test may be used for this determination, as long as the test was conducted
within 5 years before [date of rule adoption]. If compliance under this section cannot be
demonstrated, owner or operator must comply with Section 402 of this rule.
b. Section 402 In Existence and Non-Compliant
Similar to the comments regarding Section 401 above, we would recommend adding the
exceptions of Sections 104.4 and 305.1 to this Section. Additionally, we would recommend
deleting the last sentence of this Section, as it does not appear to relate to the rulemaking. We
are unaware of any “interim compliance” options within the rule.
The amended rule language would look as follows:
402.1 Except as set forth in Section 104.4 and the case-by-case RACT analysis of Section
305.1 of this rule, W when air pollution control equipment is required to achieve the emission
limits in Section 305 of this rule, the owner or operator shall comply with the increments of
progress in Section 402.2 of this rule and be in compliance with the emission limits by the date
specified in Section 402.2 of this rule. Interim compliance with the emission limits in Sections
6

305 of this rule does not exclude the owner or operator from final compliance with the emission
limits in Section 305 of this rule and the increments of progress in Section 402.2 of this rule.
c. 402.3 Removal From Service:
This Section provides an avenue for units that would be retired from service in lieu of
emissions controls or a case-by-case RACT analysis and permit limit. To make this Section
more functional for the retiring units it is important to make the effectiveness of the section not
linked to the adoption of the rule, but rather linked to the decision by the owner to retire the unit.
For example, Section 402.3 limits the window of opportunity to only 24 months. If a Section
104.4 partial exemption unit is exempt for 2 years and then exceeds its capacity factor, rather
than installing emissions controls to meet Section 305, it may seek removal from service. As
proposed, this would not be possible since this section would only be available for 24 months
after the rule is adopted. Instead, we would suggest that Section 402.3 be based on when a unit
otherwise becomes subject to Section 305 emission limits. The offered language makes this
possible, without changing obligations on existing units which do not have a partial exemption.
The second issue is to add a similar scope to the Section 402.3(a) which, as written, limits
the ability of a unit to submit a notice for removal from service to only 6 months after rule
adoption. As noted above, by linking it to when a unit becomes subject to Section 305 emissions
limits it provides an option for units which may be otherwise exempt during the first 6 months
after the rule is adopted.
The third issue is to remove the requirement for “requesting an exemption” and instead
require that the owner or operator merely submit a notice of proposed removal. This reduces the
burden on the County to create and issue an exemption when there is no reason for the extra
paperwork. Additionally, it reduces any delay caused by waiting on the County to issue the
exemption. As amended, the unit would submit the notice and then proceed to the formal
submittal of the decommissioning plan and permit revision, which is the document upon which
the County can focus its efforts.
Finally, Section 402.3(c) appears to have a mismatch between the use of 4 months of plan
approval and in the final sentence a limitation on operations past 3 months. This inconsistency
can be fixed by merely changing the 3 months to 4 months.
The amended rule language would look as follows:
402.3 Removal From Service: The owner or operator of any electric utility stationary gas
turbine, electric utility steam generating unit or cogeneration steam generating unit used to
generate electric power in existence on [date of rule adoption] that is expected to be removed
from service within 24 months of [date of rule adoption] becoming subject to Section 305
emission limits shall be exempt from the emission limits in Section 305 of this rule if it complies
with the following:
a. Within 6 months of becoming subject to Section 305 emission limits [date of rule adoption],
submit to the Control Officer a notification requesting an exemption from the emission limits in
Section 305 of this rule of Proposed Removal from Service.
b. Within 14 months of submitting notification under Section 402.3(a) receiving the exemption,
submit to the Control Officer a decommissioning plan and a permit revision providing that the
units will be decommissioned by a certain date.
7

c. Within 4 months of decommissioning plan and permit revision approval, discontinue operation
of the electric utility stationary gas turbine, electric utility steam generating unit or cogeneration
steam generating unit used to generate electric power, disconnect the fuel supply line(s), and
notify the Control Officer in writing of the removal from service. Operation of any electric utility
stationary gas turbine, electric utility steam generating unit or cogeneration steam generating unit
used to generate electric power beyond 3 4 months of decommissioning plan and permit revision
approval, shall be conducted in compliance with the emission limits in Section 305 of this rule.
VIII. Emergency Standby Units
In this Section the County appears to be limiting the affected units to “emergency standby
units”, however the sentence includes all affected units. It would appear that the solution for this
paragraph would be to limit the affected units.
The amended rule language would look as follows:
403 EMERGENCY STANDBY UNITS: The owner or operator of any Emergency Standby
Unit electric utility stationary gas turbine, electric utility steam generating unit or cogeneration
steam generating unit used to generate electric power in existence prior to [date of rule adoption]
shall, [within 2 months of rule adoption], submit to the Control Officer a notification requesting
an exemption from the requirements of Section 300 of this rule.
IX. Section 501.7 - Recordkeeping
Under the record keeping requirements, the County proposes that the records
demonstrating compliance with Sections 104.4, 305.1 and 305.2 include 12 month rolling
averages. The inclusion of “12 month rolling period” conflicts with the measurements set forth
in Sections 305.1 and 305.2. The general purpose of this section appears to be a requirement to
keep records. By eliminating the contradictory language, we can still maintain the necessary
records and not introduce confusion to the compliance obligation.
The amended rule language would look as follows:
501.7 Equipment Referenced In Sections 104.4, 305.1, and 305.2: Maintain records necessary
covering a 12-month rolling period to demonstrate compliance with Sections 104.4, 305.1, or
305.2, as applicable.
Rule 323 Fuel Burning Equipment from industrial/Commercial/Institutional (ICI) Sources
During the County workshops discussing Rule 323, APS brought to the County’s attention the
dilemma caused by the inspection requirements related to boilers. APS has installed a Clayton
Boiler on its process equipment. This boiler is a state-of-the-art boiler and as such has a sealed
burner chamber which does not allow for inspection of the combustion chamber, burner or flame
pattern as required under Section 304.1(a). Rather than be penalized for having such an
advanced and efficient burner that does not allow for inspection, APS suggested that the County
provide an exception to allow APS to operate the burner in compliance with the manufacturer’s
8

recommended procedures. At the time of the workshops, the County was open to the suggestion
and offered no indication that it would not approve such a solution. We hope this was an
oversight on the County’s part, but if the County should need additional information, please let
us know and we will be happy to provide it.
The amended rule language would look as follows:
304 LIMITATIONS – NITROGEN OXIDES:
304.1 An owner or operator of any combustion equipment listed in Section 102 of this
rule, except gas turbines, with a heat input of greater than 10 MMBtu/hr to 100 MMBtu/hr,
except gas turbines, shall comply either with (a) or (b) below Sections 304.1(a) or 304.1(b) of
this rule. Gas turbines are subject to both Sections 304.1(a) and 304.1(b) of this rule below:
a. Establish initial optimal baseline concentrations for NOx and CO within 90 days of the
first usage of the combustion equipment utilizing the initial design burner specifications or
manufacturer’s recommendations to ensure good combustion practices. Tune the unit annually in
accordance with good combustion practices or a follow the manufacturer’s recommended
procedure, if applicable. , that will include the following at a minimum: If using good
combustion practices, the owner or operator shall include the following at a minimum:
(1) Inspect the burner system and clean and replace any components of the burner as
necessary to minimize emissions of NOx and CO; and
(2) Inspect the burner chamber for areas of impingement and remove if necessary; and
(3) Inspect the flame pattern and make adjustments as necessary to optimize the flame
pattern; and
(4) Inspect the system controlling the air-to-fuel ratio and ensure that it is correctly
calibrated and functioning properly; and
(5) Measure the NOx and the CO concentration of the effluent stream after each
adjustment was made with a handheld portable monitor to ensure optimal baseline concentrations
are maintained.
(6) For low emission burner systems that do not provide accessibility for combustion
chamber inspection, burner inspection, and inspection of the flame pattern, an owner or operator
shall provide documentation from the manufacturer and follow manufacturer’s recommended
procedure.
Again, we want to express our thanks to the County for the work that it did to create these
and the other rules as part of this significant rulemaking. And we are grateful for the opportunity
to comment and add what we hope is constructive and useful comments to the rule. If the
County has questions or requires greater information related to our comments, please do not
hesitate to contact us.
Sincerely,
Submitted Electronically
Michael Denby
Environmental Policy & Programs
Arizona Public Service Company
9

Michelle Mada - AQDX
From: Hether Krause - AQDX
Sent: Monday, June 13, 2016 3:43 PM
To: Johanna Kuspert - AQDX
Subject: Fwd: EPA Comments on Maricopa 322, 323 & 324
Sent from my iPhone
Begin forwarded message:
From: "Steckel, Andrew" <Steckel.Andrew@epa.gov>
Date: June 13, 2016 at 3:23:25 PM MST
To: "Heather Krause (hkrause@mail.maricopa.gov)" <hkrause@mail.maricopa.gov>, "Marina
Mejia (Mejia.Marina@azdeq.gov)" <Mejia.Marina@azdeq.gov>
Cc: "Gong, Kevin" <Gong.Kevin@epa.gov>, "McKaughan, Colleen"
<McKaughan.Colleen@epa.gov>, "Tong, Stanley" <Tong.Stanley@epa.gov>, "Yannayon,
Laura" <Yannayon.Laura@epa.gov>
Subject: EPA Comments on Maricopa 322, 323 & 324
United States Environmental Protection Agency
Region IX
75 Hawthorne Street
San Francisco, CA 94105-3901
June 13, 2016
Transmittal of EPA Rule Review Comments
To: Hether Krause, Maricopa County Environmental Services Department
hkrause@mail.maricopa.gov
Marina Mejia, Arizona Department Of Environmental Quality
mejia.marina@azdeq.gov
From: Andrew Steckel, Rulemaking Office Chief
steckel.andrew@epa.gov
Re: Maricopa County Air Quality Department, Draft Rule 322 “Power Plant Operations,” Draft
Rule 323 “Fuel Burning Equipment from Industrial/Commercial/Institutional (ICI)
Sources,” and Draft Rule 324 “Stationary Internal Combustion (IC) Engines,” posted for
public comment starting May 13, 2016.
We are providing comments on the draft rules identified above, based on our preliminary review and our
phone discussions with County staff on June 7, 2016. EPA provided comments on earlier drafts of these
rules on March 16, 2016. We appreciate that Maricopa reviewed and addressed some of our concerns,
but some of our comments below reference discussion from this earlier letter. Please direct any
questions about our comments to me at (415) 947-4115 or to Kevin Gong at (415) 972-3073.
1

Rule 322 – Power Plant Operations
Section 102 Applicability
The draft rule language states that subject equipment built or modified after May 10, 1996 must comply
with the limits in this rule, unless the equipment is already subject to more stringent federally enforceable
standards, such as NSPS and NESHAPs standards. This exception conflicts with the Clean Air Act
requirement that ‘major sources’ in ozone nonattainment areas classified at moderate or higher must be
regulated under a SIP-approved RACT rule. If the District determines that different levels of RACT are
appropriate for different types, sizes or ages of equipment, EPA recommends outlining separate emission
limits for these different classes of equipment.
Section 104 Exemptions
104.4 The draft rule language presumes that equipment operating at less than or equal to a 10% annual
capacity factor is exempt from NOx and CO limits, and is exempt from emission control monitoring
system requirements in sections 305, 306 and 307.4. To ensure enforceability, please provide a definition
for the term “annual capacity factor” in Section 200.
104.1.c. This provision provides that gas turbines used at military training facilities and military gas
turbines used anywhere other than a garrison are exempt from the listed sections. Please remove this
exemption or provide definitions for the terms “military training facilities” and “military gas turbines”, and
demonstrate in the rule's staff report why these gas turbines should not be subject to the specified
emission standards.
Section 200 Definitions
Section 237 The second sentence in the definition of Total Dissolved Solids (TDS) appears to describe
the methodology that should be used to determine TDS. This sentence should be removed and the first
sentence modified to read “…glass fiber filter, as determined by Test Method XXX.”
Old Section 301
The current SIP contains language proposed for deletion which regulates particulate matter (PM)
emissions. We note that this section only applies to two units constructed prior to 1996. Please either
retain these limits for those units at a minimum, or provide an adequate CAA 110(l) demonstration which
supports removing these requirements for those units.
New Section 301
The draft rule language appears to state that “good combustion practices” are met for turbines if CEMS
are used (last sentence). It appears the District intends to say that if equipment is utilizing a CEMS, which
already monitors various operating parameters, then the equipment would be exempt from the
requirements of Section 301. Please revise accordingly if this is correct or otherwise clarify the intent of
this last sentence. This provision is also found in Section 501.6.
Section 307
The definition of an “approved combustion control system” is unclear. The District must define the criteria
for approval, and EPA must review and approve of any such alternative control systems if the criteria are
not specific.
The inclusion of “other monitoring system approved by the Control Officer” is an inappropriate allowance
of director’s discretion and should be removed or require EPA approval.
2

EPA recognizes that a Predictive Emissions Monitoring System (PEMS), if certified in accordance with the
applicable provisions of Performance Specification 16, may be appropriate for certain emission units. We
recommend that their usage for compliance purposes be restricted to units with a heat input rate of 250
MMBtu/hr or less, which aligns with other Federal guidance.
The provision that allows the Control Officer to approve any other monitoring system to be equivalent to a
CEMS is too broad. Please strike this language, or also require that EPA must approve of any such
alternative monitoring systems.
Low Mass Emissions (LME) as cited at 219 and 307.4 is not a suitable substitute for Continuous
Emissions Monitoring Systems (CEMS) for the purposes of SIP compliance determination with an
emissions limit.
Section 504
Alternative test methods may not be used upon sole approval by the Control Officer. Please delete this
provision or include language that also requires EPA approval for alternative methods.
Rule 323 – Fuel Burning Equipment from ICI Sources
Section 104
As we have stated in previous comments for this section, please include:
1. appropriate limits on the length of emergency condition and alternative emergency limits for units fired
with emergency fuel that are otherwise normally fired with natural gas and,
2. Clarification on the exceptions for units at military training facilities, as this is not defined.
Section 301.3
As stated in previous comments for this section, please define the frequency of monitoring required to
comply with the provisions for “good combustion practices” for turbines.
Section 306.1
A facility may comply with the emission limits in the rule by installing and operating an emission control
system (ECS). While an ECS may be one possible way to meeting emission limits, it generally cannot
substitute for meeting limits, unless specific control measures or a percent effectiveness are defined as a
part of any required ECS that may be approved by the Control Officer. The definition of an ECS at section
206 also allows discretion to the Control Officer on the types of required control devices, practices, and
monitoring needs for an effective ECS. Please either define a set of specific required control technologies
or practices that must be a part of any effective ECS, or define a required emissions reduction (for
example, 80% reduction of existing NOx emissions).
Section 503.1a
This section allows for various documents to verify compliance with the ultra-low sulfur diesel fuel limit.
Maricopa County should ensure the documents listed give accurate values and use enforceable test
methods. For example, EPA generally has not approved the use of Safety Data Sheets (SDS)/Material
Data Safety Sheets (MSDS) to determine compliance in SIP rules unless the SDS/MSDS specifies that
the compound of interest was determined by an approved EPA method.
Sections 503.2a (Source Test) and 503.3 (CEMS)
These sections state that no compliance determinations will be made during startup and shutdown. This
does not align with EPA’s startup, shutdown, and malfunction (SSM) policy, particularly in the case of
3

CEMS-equipped units (see EPA’s Startup, Shutdown and Malfunction Policy at
https://www3.epa.gov/airquality/urbanair/sipstatus/emissions.html).
Please revise Draft Rule 323 to include alternative numerical limits for operations during these periods,
require best operating practices (see, for example, Yolo-Solano Air Quality Management District Rule
2.34 for Stationary Gas Turbines), or require that units comply with the standard limits during SSM
events.
Section 504
Alternative test methods may not be use upon sole approval by the Control Officer. Please remove this
provision or include language that also requires EPA approval for alternative methods.
Rule 324 – Stationary Reciprocating IC Engines
Sections 103.2b and 212.1d
As stated in previous comments, these sections allows discretion to the Control Officer on the definition of
“nonroad engine” without guidance or restriction on how the Control Officer shall make that determination.
Please remove this discretion.
Section 304.3
Limits for engines subject to NSPS are not automatically considered RACT by EPA for the purposes of
SIP approval. The District must provide analysis that NSPS requirements cited here meet RACT, or
provide the intended numerical limits and operational requirements explicitly within this rule for EPA to
review for SIP approval purposes.
Sections 207, 208 and 306
New language at section 306 treats equivalent and identical replacement engines the same as the
engines they are replacing for the purposes of rule compliance. However, the definition for “Equivalent
Replacement Engine” would allow for an engine that could be up to 20% larger than the original engine,
with the requirement that such larger replacement must also decrease NOx emissions by at least 2%.
While this does not pose an approvability issue for Draft Rule 324, the County should clarify that this
definition only applies in this context, and does not have broader implications.
Section 501.4
This section allows for various documents to verify compliance with the ultra low sulfur diesel fuel limit.
Maricopa County should ensure the documents listed give accurate values and use enforceable test
methods. For example, EPA generally has not approved the use of SDS)/MSDS to determine compliance
in SIP rules unless the SDS/MSDS specifies that the compound of interest was determined by an
approved EPA method.
Section 503
Alternative test methods may not be used upon sole approval by the Control Officer. Please remove this
provision or include language that also requires EPA approval for alternative methods.
4

Return to list of attachments

Return to list of attachments
Executive Summary
of the Report to the Board of Supervisors
Prepared by the Maricopa County Air Quality Department
Board Hearing Date: November 2, 2016
Case #/Title: AQ-2015-004-Rule 324 (Stationary Internal Combustion (IC) Engines)
Agenda Item:
Supervisor Districts: All Districts
The Maricopa County Air Quality Department (department) complied with all statutory and county policies
throughout this rulemaking process. Per the Enhanced Regulatory Outreach Program (EROP) Policy: “In addition
to the required staff report, an executive summary of the report including an overview of stakeholder input and
staff responses will be provided to the Board of Supervisors at least one week prior to any Board of Supervisors’
public hearing.”
Overview Of The Report To The Board Of Supervisors:
The department is requesting the Board of Supervisors to approve amendments to Maricopa County Air Pollution
Control Regulations regarding Rule 324 (Stationary Internal Combustion(IC) Engines) and approve submitting
the amended rule as a revision to the (Arizona) State Implementation Plan (SIP).
The purpose of this rulemaking is to address the requirements of the SIP for “moderate” nonattainment for the
2008 eight-hour ozone national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS). The proposed amendments in Rule 324
include Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT) for nitrogen oxides (NOx).
Overview Of Stakeholder Input And Staff Responses:
Three Stakeholder Workshops were held: August 3, 2015, November 19, 2015, and January 27, 2016.
Stakeholders expressed a general understanding for the need for rule revisions based on the department’s
nonattainment status; however, Stakeholders were concerned about the emission limitations and what is
considered “RACT” and what is considered “beyond RACT”. In addition, questions were raised regarding the
following:
• The correlation of Rule 324 with New Source Performance Standards (NSPS)
• The emission limitations for existing engines and new engines
• The compliance schedule for equipment being removed from service
A 30-day comment period was held May-June 2016. During the 30-day comment period, the department received
written comments from the Arizona Public Service Company (APS), Salt River Project Agricultural Improvement
and Power District (SRP), and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Stakeholders’ concerns were
mainly clarifying in nature; their main concern was that the rule properly reflect RACT for NOx. Their comments
addressed partial exemptions, definitions, limitations for non-emergency engines, and compliance determinations.
In addition, the EPA commented that the emissions limits for engines may not be considered RACT for the
purpose of State Implementation Plan (SIP) approval. In response to the EPA’s comment, a review was conducted
by Eastern Research Group, Inc. (ERG) to compare the emissions limits in Rule 324 to other similar rules in other
similar jurisdictions, as well as national standards and data sources. The reviewed showed that the emissions
limits for NOx in Rule 324 fall within range of emissions limits found in federal standards and found in other
similar jurisdictions.
The department addressed all of the comments; responses have been incorporated into the draft rule and are
explained in the Preamble of the Draft Notice of Final Rulemaking.

Return to list of attachments
Report to the Board of Supervisors
Prepared by the Maricopa County Air Quality Department
Board of Health Meeting Date: April 25, 2016
Board Hearing Date: November 2, 2016
Case #/Title: AQ-2015-004-Rule 324 (Stationary Internal Combustion (IC) Engines)
Agenda Item:
Supervisor Districts: All Districts
Applicant: Staff
Request: Approve amendments to Maricopa County Air Pollution Control
Regulations regarding Rule 324 (Stationary Internal Combustion (IC)
Engines) and approve submitting the amended rule as a revision to the
(Arizona) State Implementation Plan (SIP).
The purpose of this rulemaking is to revise the rule to address the
requirements of the SIP for “moderate” nonattainment for the 2008 eight-
hour ozone national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS). The
proposed amendments in Rule 324 include Reasonably Available Control
Technology (RACT) for nitrogen oxides (NOx).
Support/Opposition: During the 30-day comment period, the department received written
comments from the Arizona Public Service Company (APS), Salt River
Project Agricultural Improvement and Power District (SRP), and the
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA); they stated their opinion
as “support” or “other”. Stakeholders’ concerns were mainly clarifying in
nature; their main concern was that the rule properly reflect RACT for
NOx. Their comments addressed partial exemptions, definitions,
limitations for non-emergency engines, and compliance determinations.
In addition, the EPA commented that the emissions limits for engines
may not be considered RACT for the purpose of State Implementation
Plan (SIP) approval. In response to the EPA’s comment, a review was
conducted by Eastern Research Group, Inc. (ERG) to compare the
emissions limits in Rule 324 to other similar rules in other similar
jurisdictions, as well as national standards and data sources. The
reviewed showed that the emissions limits for NOx in Rule 324 fall
within range of emissions limits found in federal standards and found in
other similar jurisdictions. The department addressed all of the
comments; responses have been incorporated into the draft rule and are
explained in the Preamble of the Draft Notice of Final Rulemaking.
Staff
Recommendation: Approve
Board of Health
Recommendation: Approve per Staff recommended language
Additional
Comments: This regulatory change is following the Enhanced Regulatory Outreach
Program (EROP) Policy and workflow process. The County Manager
briefed the Board of Supervisors regarding this rulemaking in May 2015.

Stakeholder workshops were held June 2015 through February 2016. On
April 25, 2016, the Board of Health approved this regulatory change for
the Expedited Process.
Presented By: Philip A. McNeely, R.G., Director
Prepared By: Hether Krause
Attachments: Summary of the proposed regulatory change (See Item 6 of the Draft
Notice of Final Rulemaking)
Analysis of input received during the process and how that input was
responded to (See Item 13 of the Draft Notice of Final Rulemaking)
Language of proposed regulatory change or amendment (See Item 17 of
the Draft Notice of Final Rulemaking)
Preamble required by Arizona Revised Statutes (A.R.S.) § 49-471.05
(See Draft Notice of Final Rulemaking)
Minutes from Board of Health meeting
Copies of all written and electronic Stakeholder input
Signed copy of the Maricopa County Resolution “Moratorium on
Increased Regulatory Burdens”

Return to list of attachments
DRAFT NOTICE OF FINAL RULEMAKING
MARICOPA COUNTY AIR POLLUTION CONTROL REGULATIONS
REGULATION III – CONTROL OF AIR CONTAMINANTS
RULE 324: STATIONARY INTERNAL COMBUSTION (IC) ENGINES
PREAMBLE
1. Rule affected Rulemaking action
Rule 324: Stationary Internal Combustion (IC) Engines Amend
2. Statutory authority for the rulemaking:
Authorizing statutes: A.R.S. §§ 49-474, 49-479, and 49-480
Implementing Statute: A.R.S. § 49-112
3. The effective date of the rule:
Tentative date of adoption: November 2, 2016
4. List of public notices addressing this rulemaking:
Notice of Briefing to Maricopa County Manager: May 2015
Notice of Stakeholder Workshops: August 3, 2015, November 19, 2015, and January 27, 2016
Notice of Maricopa County Board of Health Meeting: April 25, 2016
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking: 22 A.A.R. 1145, May 13, 2016
5. Name and address of department personnel with whom persons may communicate regarding the
rulemaking:
Name: Johanna M. Kuspert or Hether Krause
Maricopa County Air Quality Department
Planning and Analysis Division
Address: 1001 N Central Avenue, Suite 125
Phoenix, Arizona 85004
Telephone: (602) 506-6010
Fax: (602) 506-6179
Return to list of attachments
E-mail: aqplanning@mail.maricopa.gov
6. Explanation of the rule, including the department's reasons for initiating the rulemaking:
Summary:
Rule 324 (Stationary Internal Combustion (IC) Engines) limits the discharge of carbon monoxide, nitrogen
oxides (NOx), sulfur oxides, volatile organic compounds (VOCs), and particulate matter emissions from
stationary internal combustion (IC) engines. Revisions to Rule 324 are being proposed to address the
requirements of the State Implementation Plan (SIP) for “moderate” nonattainment for the 2008 eight-hour
ozone national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS). Rule 324 revisions will include Reasonably
Available Control Technology (RACT) for NOx.
In addition, the proposed amendments correct typographical or other clerical errors; make minor
grammatical changes to improve readability or clarity; modify the format, numbering, order, capitalization,
punctuation, or syntax of certain text to increase standardization within and among rules; or make various
other minor changes of a purely editorial nature. As these changes do not alter the sense, meaning, or effect
of the rules, they are not described in detail here, but can be readily discerned in the “underline/ strikeout”
version of the rules contained in Item 14 of this notice.

Issues Raised and Discussed During this Rulemaking Process:
Stakeholders expressed a general understanding for the need for rule revisions based on the department’s
nonattainment status; however, Stakeholders were concerned about the emission limitations and what is
considered “RACT” and what is considered “beyond RACT”. In addition, questions were raised regarding
the following:
• The correlation of Rule 324 with New Source Performance Standards (NSPS)
• The emission limitations for existing engines and new engines
• The compliance schedule for equipment being removed from service
Description of Proposed Amendments:
Regarding the Title of the Rule:
The title of the rule is proposed to be changed to “Stationary Reciprocating Internal Combustion Engines
(RICE)” and the term “stationary internal combustion (IC) engine” is proposed to be changed to “stationary
reciprocating internal combustion engine (RICE)” in the definitions and throughout the rule.
Regarding Applicability:
• Section 102 (Applicability): Rule 324 is proposed to continue to apply to spark-ignition engines or
compression-ignition engines including stationary RICE used in cogeneration, with a rated brake
horsepower (rated bhp) of greater than 250 and to also apply to a combination of stationary RICE each
with a rated bhp greater than 50 used at a source, whose maximum aggregate rated bhp is greater than
250. Rule 324 is proposed to be revised to also apply to stationary RICE that are subject to federal
standards of performance.
• Section 102.3 (Applicability): Rule 324 is proposed to include new Section 102.3 (per a Stakeholder’s
comment) a provision that states that engines subject to Rule 324 may be subject to New Source
Performance Standards (NSPS) and/or National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants
(NESHAP). This text is similar to text in Rule 322 (Power Plant Operations) and Rule 323 (Fuel
Burning Equipment from Industrial/Commercial/Institutional (ICI) Sources).
Regarding Exemptions:
• Section 103.2 (Exemptions): Rule 324 is proposed to clarify that nonroad internal combustion (IC)
engines are not considered stationary RICE, to include nonroad internal combustion (IC) engines in
new Section 103.2 and to add that a nonroad internal combustion (IC) engine must be operated and
approved by the Control Officer as a nonroad internal combustion (IC) engine in order for such engine
to be exempt from all of the requirements of Rule 324.
• Sections 104, 105, and 106 (Partial Exemptions): Rule 324 is proposed to add “as defined in this rule”
after “emergency engine” to clarify that the provision that an emergency engine shall not exceed 500
hours of operation applies to the definition of “emergency engine” and applies to an emergency engine
subject to Section 104, to clarify which provisions in Rule 324 apply to low usage non-emergency
engines, and to add a partial exemption for engines subject to 40 CFR Part 63, Subpart ZZZZ.
Regarding Definitions:
• The requirements in Rule 324 are proposed to be harmonized with New Source Performance Standards
(NSPS) IIII, JJJJ, and Most Achievable Control Technology (MACT) ZZZZ. The definitions of
“existing engine” and “new engine” are proposed to be deleted from Rule 324; the terms will not be
used in the rule. Rule 324 is proposed to refer to the dates before and after which NSPS were
promulgated. Rule 324 is proposed to apply to spark-ignition engines and compression-ignition
engines with a rated brake horsepower of greater than 250 and to any stationary reciprocating internal
combustion engine subject to the federal standards of performance set forth in 40 CFR 60, Subpart IIII
for compression-ignition engines or 40 CFR 60, Subpart JJJJ for spark-ignition engine.
• The definition of “Identical Replacement Engine” is proposed to be made consistent with the definition
of “Equivalent Replacement Engine” and the definition of “Internal Combustion (IC) Engine,

Nonroad” is proposed to be clarified, so the text corresponds with the introductory text and
corresponds with the definition of “Nonroad” in 40 CFR 1068.30. The U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) commented that the proposed text that a nonroad IC engine must be approved by the
Control Officer (proposed Section 212.1(d)) allows discretion to the Control Officer without guidance
or restriction on how the Control Officer shall make the determination. The EPA commented that this
text/discretion should be removed. Accordingly, the definition of “nonroad IC engine” is proposed to
include an introductory statement that the requirements of a nonroad IC engine must be met and
approved by the Control Officer in order for the engine to be determined to be a nonroad IC engine;
the intent is that even if the engine meets the definition of a “nonroad IC engine”, it is not a nonroad IC
engine until the Control Officer approves it.
• The term “Prime Engine” is proposed to be changed to “Non-Emergency Engine” and the definition of
“Non-Emergency Engine” is proposed to be added, which is proposed to be the same definition as the
definition of “Prime Engine”. The term “prime engine” is proposed to be changed to “non-emergency
engine” throughout the rule.
• The definition of “Internal Combustion (IC) Engine, Nonroad” is proposed to be changed to “Nonroad
Internal Combustion (IC) Engine”, since “nonroad” is the most important term.
• The definition of “Internal Combustion (IC) Engine, Stationary” is proposed to be changed to
“Stationary Internal Combustion Engine (RICE)”, since “stationary” is the most important term.
Regarding Good Combustion Practices:
• Section 302 (Good Combustion Practices/Tuning Procedure for Stationary RICE): Rule 323 is
proposed to include a provision that a handheld monitor may be used by the Control Officer to
determine compliance.
Regarding Limitations for Non-Emergency Engines:
• Section 304 (Limitations for Non-Emergency Engines): Rule 324 is proposed to clarify the three
options that non-emergency engines have for complying with Rule 324. A source can comply with (1)
the provisions for add-on control equipment for non-emergency engines, (2) the current emission
limitations, or (3) the federal standards of performance for non-emergency engines. The current
emission limits in Rule 324 are proposed to be retained; such limits apply to:
• Engines manufactured prior to October 22, 2003 (the date when Rule 324 was adopted)
• Engines manufactured on or after October 22, 2003 but prior to July 11, 2005 (the date the New
Source Performance Standards were adopted for compression-ignition engines)
• Engines manufactured on or after October 22, 2003 but prior to June 12, 2006 (the date the New
Source Performance Standards were adopted for spark-ignition engines)
• Rule 324 is proposed to be revised to include a requirement that spark-ignition engines manufactured
after June 12, 2006 and compression-ignition engines manufactured after July 11, 2005 comply with
federal standards of performance. Per Stakeholders’ comments, Section 304.2, Table 2 is proposed to
not include a footnote regarding test methods for PM; Section 500 includes test methods for PM.
• Section 306 (Equivalent Replacement Engine or Identical Replacement Engine): Rule 324 is proposed
to clarify when an equivalent replacement engine or an identical replacement engine is to be treated as
the original stationary RICE. Proposed Section 306.2 has been removed; the text is captured in
proposed Section 307 (Modification to a Stationary RICE).
• Section 307 (Modification to a Stationary RICE): Rule 324 is proposed to add Section 307 to address if
a modification is made to a stationary RICE.
• Section 308 (Non-Resetting Totalizing Hour Meter): Rule 324 is proposed to add Section 308 to
require the installation, operation, and maintenance of non-resetting totalizing hour meter.
Regarding Administrative Requirements:

• Section 401 (Compliance Schedule-Stationary RICE Being Removed from Service) is proposed to
require that if a stationary RICE must be removed from service because such engine does not comply
with the emission limits in Rule 324, then the stationary RICE that replaces such engine must comply
with all applicable provisions of Rule 324, e.g., limitations for fuel, limitations for opacity, and with
the federal standards of performance for non-emergency engines.
• Section 402 (Compliance Schedule-Non-Resetting Totalizing Hour Meter) is proposed to be added; a
non-resetting totalizing hour meter must be installed, operated, and maintained on a stationary RICE.
Regarding Compliance Determinations:
• Section 501 (Compliance Determination) is proposed to be clarified regarding the compliance
determination requirements for stationary RICE, an engine family, and engines with a displacement of
greater than or equal to 30 liters per cylinder. Also, the compliance determination for low sulfur oil
verification (Section 501.3) is proposed to be changed to a compliance determination for ultra low
sulfur diesel verification consistent with federal standards. Due to the EPA’s comments, additional
language was added to clarify that sulfur content verification documents must provide accurate values
and utilize enforceable test methods to determine the sulfur content. Also, the test method for
determining sulfur content of waste gas is proposed to be added in Sections 501.4 and 504.16
(Compliance Determination-Test Methods Incorporated by Reference).
• Section 501.1(d) (Compliance Determination-Stationary RICE) is proposed to be added. Rule 324 is
proposed to be revised to include a requirement that sources that choose add-on control equipment for
non-emergency engines (Section 304.1) shall demonstrate compliance by installing, operating, and
maintaining in calibration, devices that continuously monitor the operational characteristics of the
engine and any NOx emission reduction system.
• Section 503 (Compliance Determination-Test Methods Incorporated by Reference) is proposed to be
clarified to allow alternative test methods.
• Section 504.12 (Compliance Determination-Test Methods Incorporated by Reference): The test
method “American Society of Testing Materials, ASTM Method D1266-98, (“Standard Test Method
for Sulfur in Petroleum Products - Lamp Method”), 1998” is proposed to be deleted. The EPA
commented that the test method may not be appropriate; its range is 0.01-0.4% which will not be able
to verify compliance with the definition of ultra low sulfur diesel fuel at <0.0015%.
7. Demonstration of compliance with A.R.S. §49-112:
Under A.R.S. § 49-479(C), a county may not adopt a rule or ordinance that is more stringent than the rules
adopted by the Director of the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ) for similar sources
unless it demonstrates compliance with the applicable requirements of A.R.S. §49-112.
§ 49-112 County regulation; standards
§ 49-112(A)
When authorized by law, a county may adopt a rule, ordinance or other regulation that is more stringent
than or in addition to a provision of this title or rule adopted by the director or any board or commission
authorized to adopt rules pursuant to this title if all of the following conditions are met:
1. The rule, ordinance or other regulation is necessary to address a peculiar local condition.
2. There is credible evidence that the rule, ordinance or other regulation is either;
(a) Necessary to prevent a significant threat to public health or the environment that results from a
peculiar local condition and is technically and economically feasible.
(b) Required under a federal statute or regulation, or authorized pursuant to an intergovernmental
agreement with the federal government to enforce federal statutes or regulations if the county rule,
ordinance or other regulation is equivalent to federal statutes or regulation.
3. Any fee or tax adopted under the rule, ordinance or other regulation will not exceed the reasonable
costs of the county to issue and administer that permit or plan approval program.

§ 49-112(B)
When authorized by law, a county may adopt rules, ordinances or other regulations in lieu of a state
program that are as stringent as a provision of this title or rule adopted by the director or any board or
commission authorized to adopt rules pursuant to this title if the county demonstrates that the cost of
obtaining permits or other approvals from the county will approximately equal or be less than the fee or
cost of obtaining similar permits or approvals under this title or any rule adopted pursuant to this title. If the
state has not adopted a fee or tax for similar permits or approvals, the county may adopt a fee when
authorized by law in the rule, ordinance or other regulation that does not exceed the reasonable costs of the
county to issue and administer that permit or plan approval program.
The department complies with A.R.S. § 49-112(A) in that Maricopa County fails to meet the National
Ambient Air Quality Standards for both ozone and particulates. While currently classified as a “marginal”
ozone nonattainment area, the county recently failed to meet 2008 8-hour ozone standard by the marginal
area attainment date and anticipates EPA will issue a notice proposing to re-classify the area to “moderate”.
Further, a portion of the county was classified as a serious ozone nonattainment area under the previous 1-
hour ozone standard requiring the county to continue to maintain the measures and requirements that
allowed the county to attain that standard. Currently, a portion of Maricopa County and Apache Junction in
Pinal County is designated serious nonattainment for the PM10 24-hour standard. This is the only serious
PM10 nonattainment area in Arizona. Revisions to Rule 324 are being proposed to address the requirements
of the State Implementation Plan (SIP) for “moderate” nonattainment for the 2008 eight-hour ozone
national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS). The proposed amendments in Rule 324 include
Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT) for NOx.
The department complies with A.R.S. § 49-112(B) in that the proposed amendments to Rule 324 are not
more stringent than or in addition to a provision of Title 49 or rule adopted by the director or any board or
commission authorized to adopt rules pursuant to Title 49, address the peculiar local conditions in
Maricopa County, are authorized under A.R.S. Title 49, Chapter 3, Article 3, and are not in lieu of a state
program.
8. Documents or studies referenced and/or reviewed for this rulemaking:
Not applicable
9. Showing of good cause why the rule is necessary to promote a statewide interest if the rule will
diminish a previous grant of authority of a political subdivision:
Not applicable
10. Summary of the economic, small business, and consumer impact:
The following discussion addresses each of the elements required for an economic, small business and
consumer impact statement under A.R.S. § 41-1055.
An identification of the rulemaking.
This rulemaking is proposing to revise Rule 324 (Stationary Internal Combustion (IC) Engines).
An identification of the persons who will be directly affected by, bear the costs of or directly benefit
from the rulemaking.
The persons who will be directly affected by and bear the costs of this rulemaking will be facilities in
Maricopa County that use stationary spark- or compression-ignited RICE including stationary RICE used in
cogeneration with a rating of greater than 250 brake horsepower (rated bhp), and facilities that use a
combination of stationary RICE each with a rated bhp greater than 50 used at a source, whose maximum
aggregate rated bhp is greater than 250. The department has issued permits to more than 590 facilities.
A cost benefit analysis of the following:
(a) The probable costs and benefits to the implementing agency and other agencies directly affected
by the implementation and enforcement of the rulemaking.
Because this rulemaking does not impose any new compliance burdens on regulated entities or
introduce additional regulatory requirements, the department deemed that none of the revisions have

potentially significant economic impacts. It is expected that the department will benefit from the
increased clarity of the rule with decreased time to inspect a facility or prepare a permit. In addition,
the rulemaking will not impose increased monetary or regulatory costs on other state agencies, political
subdivisions of this state, persons, or individuals so regulated.
The benefits of the rule revision are anticipated to be a result of the following changes:
- Changing the title of the rule to: Stationary Reciprocating Internal Combustion Engines (RICE);
- Adding a requirement that spark-ignition engines manufactured after June 12, 2006 and
compression-ignition engines manufactured after July 11, 2005 comply with the federal standards
of performance;
- Adding a compliance schedule for installing, maintaining, and operating a non-resetting totalizing
hour meter;
- Reformatting Tables 1, 2, and 3 to clarify emission limits and retain current emission limits;
- Clarifying the compliance schedule for stationary RICE being removed from service;
- Clarifying that alternative test methods may be used if approved by the Control Officer.
The requirement that spark-ignition engines and compression-ignition engines must comply with
existing federal standards of performance and the compliance schedule for a non-resetting totalizing
hour-meter are revisions that aligns Maricopa County requirements with existing federal standards.
Based on observations by department inspectors, all facilities subject to this rule as revised should
already be in compliance with this requirement; therefore, no incremental costs are associated with the
Rule 324 revisions.
(b) The probable costs and benefits to a political subdivision of this state directly affected by the
implementation and enforcement of the rulemaking
The rule revisions will not impose increased monetary or regulatory costs on other state agencies,
political subdivisions of this state, persons, or individuals so regulated.
(c) The probable costs and benefits to businesses directly affected by the rulemaking, including any
anticipated effect on the revenues or payroll expenditures of employers who are subject to the
rulemaking.
The department anticipates that increased clarity provided by the Rule 324 revisions will provide a
benefit to the regulated community; it will take less time for sources subject to the rule to understand
and comply with the rule, which leads to increased compliance, which leads to decreased costs of
compliance to the regulated community. The department does not anticipate these rule revisions to
have a significant impact on a person's income, revenue, or employment in this state related to this
activity. The rule revision will not impose increased monetary or regulatory costs on individuals so
regulated.
A general description of the probable impact on private and public employment in businesses,
agencies and political subdivisions of this state directly affected by the rulemaking.
The rule revisions will not impose increased monetary or regulatory costs on other state agencies, political
subdivisions of this state, persons, or individuals so regulated.
A statement of the probable impact of the rulemaking on small businesses.
The rule revisions will not impose increased monetary or regulatory costs on any business, persons, or
individuals so regulated.
(a) An identification of the small businesses subject to the rulemaking.
Small businesses subject to this rulemaking are those facilities in Maricopa County that use stationary
spark- or compression-ignited RICE including stationary RICE used in cogeneration with a rating of
greater than 250 brake horsepower (rated bhp), and facilities that use a combination of stationary RICE

each with a rated bhp greater than 50 used at a source, whose maximum aggregate rated bhp is greater
than 250.
(b) The administrative and other costs required for compliance with the rulemaking.
This rulemaking updates and clarifies existing rule provisions and definitions to be consistent with
federal performance standards and to reduce confusion and improve understanding and readability.
The department considered the implications of the proposed amendments to the regulated entities and
the implementing agency and deemed that none of the rule revisions have potentially significant
economic impacts.
(c) A description of the methods that the agency may use to reduce the impact on small businesses.
(i) Establishing less costly compliance requirements in the rulemaking for small businesses.
By correcting and clarifying existing rule provisions and definitions, this rulemaking lessens or
eases the regulatory burden for small businesses.
(ii) Establishing less costly schedules or less stringent deadlines for compliance in the
rulemaking.
This rulemaking corrects or clarifies existing rule provisions and definitions to reduce confusion
and improve understanding and readability. Although the revised rule does include a schedule for
compliance with installation of non-resetting totalizing hour meters, based on department
inspector observations, the subject sources should already be in compliance with this requirement;
therefore, no cost impacts on businesses, including small businesses, are anticipated.
(iii) Exempting small businesses from any or all requirements of the rulemaking.
This rulemaking corrects or clarifies existing rule provisions and definitions to reduce confusion
and improve understanding and readability.
(d) The probable cost and benefit to private persons and consumers who are directly affected by the
rulemaking.
This rulemaking does not impose any new compliance burdens on regulated entities or introduce
additional regulatory requirements and will not impose increased monetary or regulatory costs on any
business, persons, or individuals so regulated. As such, there are no costs to pass through to consumers
which means there are no impacts on consumers.
A statement of the probable effect on state revenues.
The rule revisions will not impose increased monetary or regulatory costs on other state agencies, political
subdivisions of this state, persons, or individuals so regulated. Without costs to pass through to customers,
there is no projected change in consumer purchase patterns and, thus, no impact on state revenues from
sales taxes.
A description of any less intrusive or less costly alternative methods of achieving the purpose of the
rulemaking.
This rulemaking corrects or clarifies existing rule provisions and definitions to reduce confusion and
improve understanding and readability.
11. Name and address of department personnel with whom persons may communicate regarding the
accuracy of the economic, small business, and consumer impact:
Name: Johanna M. Kuspert or Hether Krause
Maricopa County Air Quality Department
Planning and Analysis Division
Address: 1001 N Central Avenue, Suite 125
Phoenix, AZ 85004

Telephone: (602) 506-6010
Fax: (602) 506-6179
E-mail: aqplanning@mail.maricopa.gov
12. Description of the changes between the proposed rule, including supplemental notices and final rule:
Since the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking was published on May 13, 2016 (22 A.A.R 1145), the
department is proposing the following additional amendments:
• Section 103.2 (Exemptions): Propose to not include proposed new text “a piece of equipment that is
approved by the Control Officer as a nonroad IC engine” in Section 103.2(b), per comments from the
Salt River Project Agricultural Improvement and Power District (SRP) and the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA).
• Sections 104, 105, 106 (Partial Exemptions): Propose to revise the introductory statements to state in part
“…shall comply only with the provisions of…”, per comments from SRP.
• Sections 105.1 and 105.2 (Partial Exemptions For Low Usage Non-Emergency Engines): Propose to
change proposed new text “hours in any 12 consecutive-calendar-month period” to “hours per calendar
year” to be consistent with text in Section 104.5 (Partial Exemptions For Emergency Engines) and to be
consistent with text in 40 CFR Part 60, Subpart IIII and 40 CFR Part 60, Subpart JJJJ.
• Section 207.3 (Definition of “Equivalent Replacement Engine”): Propose to include new text “for the
purpose of this rule” to the end-of the first sentence, per comments from the EPA.
• Section 212.1 (Definition of “Nonroad Internal Combustion (IC) Engine”): Propose to not include
proposed new text “upon approval by the Control Officer” in Section 212.1, per comments from the
Arizona Public Service Company (APS), SRP, and the EPA.
• Section 304.1 (Limitations For Non-Emergency Engines 250 Rated Bhp Or Greater-Add-On Control
Equipment For Non-Emergency Engines): Propose to not include proposed new text regarding add-on
control equipment for non-emergency engines - “The uncontrolled NOx emissions from the non-
emergency engines shall be reduced with add-on control equipment in compliance with Table 1 (engine
category and weight percent reduction)”.
• Section 501.1(d) (Compliance Determination-Stationary RICE): Propose to not include proposed new
text “An owner or operator of a stationary RICE shall demonstrate compliance with Section 304.1 of this
rule, by installing, operating, and maintaining in calibration, devices that continuously monitor the
operational characteristics of the engine and any NOx emission reduction system”, because the
department is proposing to not include proposed new text in Section 304.1 regarding add-on control
equipment for non-emergency engines.
• Section 501.3 (Compliance Determination-Ultra Low Sulfur Diesel Verification): Propose to revise the
new text proposed after the list of items in Sections 501.3 (a)-(f) to change “and utilize” to “or be based
on” and to add “as approved by the Administrator” after “test methods”.
• Section 501.3(d) (Compliance Determination-Ultra Low Sulfur Diesel Verification): Propose to remove
Safety Data Sheets (SDS)/Material Safety Data Sheets (MSDS) from the list of documentation of the
sulfur content of the fuel oil, per the EPA’s comments.
• Section 503 (Compliance Determination-Test Methods Incorporated By Reference): Propose to delete the
provision allowing test methods to be used upon sole approval by the Control Officer and propose to add
text that allows test methods as approved by the Administrator to be used, per the EPA’s comments.
13. Summary of the comments made regarding the rule and the department response to them:
Since the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking was published on May 13, 2016 (22 A.A.R. 1145), the
department received comments from the Arizona Public Service Company (APS), Salt River Project
Agricultural Improvement and Power District (SRP), and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA). The comments and the department’s responses are provided below.
Return to list of attachments

Comment #1: Section 103.2 (Exemptions)
In the proposed revisions to Rule 324, MCAQD is proposing to remove portions of Section 103.2, which
provided exceptions for nonroad IC engines and Section 104, which provides partial exemptions for
emergency IC engines. Based on language contained in the preamble, the details in the formatting of the
modified text, which includes overlapping underline and strikethrough, and the structure of the remaining
portions of those sections, SRP believes that MCAQD has inadvertently deleted those partial sections.
Accordingly, SRP suggests MCAQD reinstate the rule language for Section 103.2 and 104 as contained in
the April 25, 2016 Board of Health Staff Report.
Response #1: Section 103.2 (Exemptions)
The department proposes to corrct the overlapping underline and strikethrough in Section 103
(Exemptions) and proposes to not include proposed new text “a piece of equipment that is approved by the
Control Officer as a nonroad IC engine” in Section 103.2(b).
Comment #2: Section 103.2(b) (Exemptions)
This section allows discretion to the Control Officer on the definition of “nonroad engine” without
guidance or restriction on how the Control Officer shall make that determination. The EPA recommends
that MCAQD remove this discretion.
Response #2: Section 103.2(b) (Exemptions)
The department proposes to not include proposed new text “a piece of equipment that is approved by the
Control Officer as a nonroad IC engine” in Section 103.2(b).
Comment #3: Sections 104, 105, And 106 (Partial Exemptions)
In the proposed revisions to Sections 104, 105, and 106, which provide partial exemptions for emergency
engines, low use non-emergency engines, and non-emergency engines subject to 40 CFR Part 63, Subpart
ZZZ, respectively, MCAQD does not indicate which sections of Rule 324 the affected engines are exempt
from. SRP suggests that MCAQD revise Sections 104, 105, and 106 to indicate which sections the affected
engines are exempt from.
Response #3: Sections 104, 105, And 106 (Parial Exemptions)
The department proposes to revise the introductory statements in Sections 104, 105, and 106 to state in part
“…shall comply only with the provisions of…”.
Comment #4: Section 212.1 (Definition of “Nonroad Internal Combustion (IC) Engine”)
The proposed revisions to the definition of “Nonroad Internal Combustion (IC) Engine” now indicates that
an engine must first receive approval from MCAQD prior to fully qualifying as a nonroad IC engine.
Qualifying as a nonroad IC engine is critical since all nonroad IC engines are fully exempt from the
requirements of Rule 324. The requirement to receive prior approval from MCAQD for all nonroad IC
engines will place a substantial amount of burden on both industry and MCAQD. Given that nonroad IC
engines encompass a wide array of equipment including tractors, cranes, bull dozers, fork lifts, portable
generators and many other portable engines, the number of IC engines requiring approval from MCAQD
will be significant, likely in the thousands. Given that nonroad IC engines have historically been exempt
from Rule 324 based on meeting the definition alone, there is likely a great number of IC engine owners
and operators that are unaware of the proposed requirements to obtain approval from MCAQD as they are
not trcking the rulemaking process. Lastly, MCAQD has not explained why requiring approval for nonroad
IC engines is necessary. If MCAQD has reason to believe that sources are inappropriately claiming
stationary IC engines as nonroad IC engines in order to claim a rule exemption, this is best addressed
through MCAQD’s compliance and enforcement divisions, rather than through a change to the provisions
of Rule 324. The change would have significant implications to owners and operators of nonroad IC
engines and SRP strongly urges MCAQD to not finalize such approval requirements in the final rule.
Response #4: Section 212.1 (Definition of “Nonroad Internal Combustion (IC) Engine”)
The department proposes to not include proposed new text “upon approval by the Control Officer” in
Section 212.1.

Comment #5: Section 212.1 (Definition of “Nonroad Internal Combustion (IC) Engine”)
Section 212 of Rule 324 states “upon approval by the Control Officer…”. Does this mean we now have to
have all nonroad engines approved by the Control Officer? APS has dozens , if not hundreds, of nonroad
engines located within Maricopa County. This includes portable light fixtures, air compressors, nonroad
engines used throughout the County to provide power at construction sites. It is unrealistic and unnecessary
to have approval on these units since they clearly meet the definition of “nonroad engine”.
Response #5: Section 212.1 (Definition of “Nonroad Internal Combustion (IC) Engine”)
The department proposes to not include proposed new text “upon approval by the Control Officer” in
Section 212.1.
Comment #6: Section 212.1 (Definition of “Nonroad Internal Combustion (IC) Engine”)
This section allows discretion to the Control Officer on the definition of “nonroad engine” without
guidance or restriction on how the Control Officer shall make that determination. The EPA recommends
that MCAQD remove this discretion.
Response #6: Section 212.1 (Definition of “Nonroad Internal Combustion (IC) Engine”)
The department proposes to not include proposed new text “upon approval by the Control Officer” in
Section 212.1.
Comment #7: Section 304.3 (Limitations For Non-Emergency Engines 250 Rated BHP Or Greater-Federal
Standards Of Performance For Non-Emergency Engines)
Limits for engines subject to NSPS are not automatically considered RACT by EPA for the purposes of SIP
approval. MCAQD must provide analysis that NSPS requirements cited here meet RACT or provide the
intended numerical limits and operational requirements explicitly within this rule for EPA to review for SIP
approval purposes.
Response #7: Section 304.3 (Limitations For Non-Emergency Engines 250 Rated BHP Or Greater-Federal
Standards Of Performance For Non-Emergency Engines)
A review was conducted by Eastern Research Group, Inc. (ERG) to compare the emissions limits in Rule
324 to other similar rules in other similar jurisdictions, as well as national standards and data sources. ERG
reviewed and compared State Implementation Plan (SIP) rules for IC engines in several areas of California
to the NSPS Subparts IIII and JJJJ limits incorporated under the proposed revisions to Rule 324.
Specifically, IC engine rules for these areas were reviewed: Placer County Air Pollution Control District,
Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District, Ventura County Air Pollution Control District,
and South Coast Air Quality Management District. In addition, ERG searched the RACT/BACT/LAER
Clearinghouse (RBLC) to locate applicable control technologies. ERG’s search of the RBLC specified
processes in the Internal Combustion Engines categories, including Large Internal Combustion Engines
greater than 500 horsepower (hp) (all fuel types) and Small Internal Combustion Engines less than 500 hp
(all fuel types), with permits dating back to 2000. The search results included the following data fields:
RBLC ID, facility name and state, permit date, process name, throughput, pollutant, control technology,
and percent efficiency of control. Based on searches conducted for facilities in the IC engine category,
ERG found 283 recent RACT, BACT, and LAER decisions for CO, NOx, and VOC emissions that had
sufficient information to be included in this analysis. While the initial RBLC query returned thousands of
records, RBLC records were only used if the engine size could be determined and if the emission limits
were in units of (g/HP-hr). The majority of the RBLC determinations represent PSD-BACT determinations
and some represent LAER determinations.
The engine rules in NSPS Subparts IIII and JJJJ are complex and provide numerous subcategories of
engines subject to different emission limits. However, the NSPS rules are generally consistent with both the
California SIP rules and recent RBLC determinations, with the exception of the SIP rules for the Los
Angeles nonattainment area. The Los Angeles area area of California has been classified as being in
serious, severe, and extreme nonattainment with the 2008 8-hour ozone standard. Therefore, because these
areas have worse nonattainment statuses as compared to Maricopa County, it is expected that their IC
engine limits would be more restrictive than for a moderate nonattainment area such as Maricopa County.

The RBLC results represent 283 records that had sufficient information to be useful for comparison, Of the
283 records evaluated, 10 were for smaller compression-ignition engines (less than 250 hp). The NOx and
CO limits for these smaller engines are lower than the corresponding NSPS Subpart IIII limits for larger
engines (greater than 250 hp), while the VOC limits are higher. For the larger engines, the NSPS limits fell
within the range of the RBLC limits for most pollutants and engine types, the only exception being VOC
limits for spark-ignition engines manufactured between July 1, 2008 and January 1, 2011. A comparison of
the emission limits in the proposed Rule 324 revisions and NSPS Subparts IIII and JJJJ with the range of
limits found in RBLC and the California SIP rules shows that the emission limits in the proposed Rule 324
revisions are within the range of values found in the RBLC and as required under the California SIP rules.
Therefore, the department has determined that the NSPS requirements cited in proposed Rule 324 meet
RACT.
Comment #8: Section 306 (Equivalent Replacement Engine Or Identical Replacement Engine)
New language at Section 306 treats equivalent and identical replacement engines the same as the engines
they are replacing for the purposes of rule compliance. However, the definition of “Equivalent
Replacement Engine” would allow for an engine that could be up to 20% larger than the original engine,
with the requirement that such larger replacement must also decrease NOx emissions by at least 20%.
While this does not pose an approvability issue for draft Rule 324, the EPA requests that MCAQD clarify
that this definition only applies in this context and does not have broader implications.
Response #8: Section 306 (Equivalent Replacement Engine Or Identical Replacement Engine)
The department proposes to include new text “for the purpose this rule” to the end-of the first sentence in
Section 207.3 (Definition of “Equivalent Replacement Engine”).
Comment #9: Section 501.3 (Compliance Determination-Ultra Low Sulfur Diesel Verification)
This section allows for various documents to verify compliance with the ultra low sulfur diesel fuel limit.
MCAQD should ensure the documents listed give accurate values and use enforceable test methods. For
example, EPA generally has not approved the use of SDS/MSDS to determine compliance in SIP rules,
unless the SDS/MSDS specifies that the compound of interest was determined by an approved EPA
method.
Response #9: Section 501.3 (Compliance Determination-Ultra Low Sulfur Diesel Verification)
The department proposes to remove Safety Data Sheets (SDS)/Material Safety Data Sheets (MSDS) from
the list of documentation of the sulfur content of the fuel oil in Section 501.3(d). Also, the department
proposes to revise the new text proposed after the list of items in Sections 501.3 (a)-(f) to change “and
utilize” to “or be based on” and to add “as approved by the Administrator” after “test methods”.
Comment #10: Section 503 (Compliance Determination-Test Methods Incorporated By Reference)
Alternative test methods may not be used upon sole approval by the Control Officer. The EPA asks the
County to remove this provision or include language that also requires EPA approval for alternative
methods.
Response #10: Section 503 (Compliance Determination-Test Methods Incorporated By Reference)
The department proposes to delete the provision allowing test methods to be used upon sole approval by the
Control Officer and proposes to add text that allows test methods as approved by the Administrator to be
used.
14. Any other matters prescribed by statute that are applicable to the specific department or to any
specific rule or class of rules:
Not applicable
15. Incorporations by reference and their location in the rule:
The department incorporated by reference sections of the Code of Federal Regulations in Section 503
(Compliance Determination-Test Methods Incorporated by Reference)
16. Was this rule previously an emergency rule?

No
Return to list of attachments
17. Full text of the rule follows:
MARICOPA COUNTY
AIR POLLUTION CONTROL REGULATIONS
REGULATION III - CONTROL OF AIR CONTAMINANTS
RULE 324
STATIONARY RECIPROCATING INTERNAL COMBUSTION (IC) ENGINES (RICE)
INDEX
SECTION 100 – GENERAL
101 PURPOSE
102 APPLICABILITY
103 EXEMPTIONS
104 PARTIAL EXEMPTIONS FOR EMERGENCY ENGINES
105 PARTIAL EXEMPTIONS FOR LOW USAGE NON-EMERGENCY ENGINES
106 PARTIAL EXEMPTION FOR NON-EMERGENCY ENGINES SUBJECT TO 40 CFR PART
63, SUBPART ZZZZ
SECTION 200 – DEFINITIONS
201 AFTERCOOLER / INTERCOOLER
202 COGENERATION UNIT
203 COMPRESSION-IGNITION ENGINE
204 DIESEL ENGINE
205 EMERGENCY GENERATOR ENGINE
206 ENGINE FAMILY
207 EQUIVALENT REPLACEMENT ENGINE
208 EXISTING ENGINE
209 208 IDENTICAL REPLACEMENT ENGINE
210 INTERNAL COMBUSTION (IC) ENGINE, PORTABLE
211 INTERNAL COMBUSTION (IC) ENGINE, STATIONARY
212 209 LEAN-BURN ENGINE
213 210 LOCATION
214 LOW SULFUR OIL
215 NEW ENGINE
211 NON-EMERGENCY ENGINE
212 NONROAD INTERNAL COMBUSTION (IC) ENGINE
216 213 PART(S) PER MILLION, DRY VOLUME (PPMDV)
217 PRIME ENGINES
218 214 RATED BRAKE HORSEPOWER (RATED BHP)

219 215 RICH-BURN ENGINE
220 216 SPARK-IGNITION ENGINE
217 STATIONARY RECIPROCATING INTERNAL COMBUSTION ENGINE (RICE)
221 218 SULFUR OXIDES (SOX)
219 ULTRA LOW SULFUR DIESEL
222 220 WASTE DERIVED FUEL GAS
SECTION 300 – STANDARDS
301 LIMITATIONS FOR EXISTING AND NEW STATIONARY IC ENGINES STATIONARY
RICE - FUEL
302 ADDITIONAL LIMITATIONS FOR IC ENGINES > 250 RATED bhp
303 EQUIVALENT OR IDENTICAL ENGINE REPLACEMENT
302 GOOD COMBUSTION PRACTICES/TUNING PROCEDURE FOR STATIONARY RICE
303 LIMITATIONS FOR STATIONARY RICE - OPACITY
304 LIMITATIONS FOR NON-EMERGENCY ENGINES-250 RATED BHP OR GREATER
305 EFFICIENCY ALLOWANCE
306 EQUIVALENT REPLACEMENT ENGINE OR IDENTICAL REPLACEMENT ENGINE
307 MODIFICATION TO A STATIONARY RICE
308 NON-RESETTING TOTALIZING HOUR METER
SECTION 400 - ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS
401 COMPLIANCE SCHEDULE-STATIONARY RICE BEING REMOVED FROM SERVICE
402 COMPLIANCE SCHEDULE-NON-RESETTING TOTALIZING HOUR METER
SECTION 500 - MONITORING AND RECORDS
501 COMPLIANCE DETERMINATION
502 RECORDKEEPING/RECORDS RETENTION
503 COMPLIANCE DETERMINATION-TEST METHODS ADOPTED/INCORPORATED BY
REFERENCE
Adopted 10/23/03
Revised 10/17/07
Adopted 10/22/2003; Revised 10/17/2007; Revised MM/DD/YYYY
MARICOPA COUNTY
AIR POLLUTION CONTROL REGULATIONS
REGULATION III - CONTROL OF AIR CONTAMINANTS
RULE 324
STATIONARY RECIPROCATING INTERNAL COMBUSTION (IC) ENGINES (RICE)
SECTION 100 – GENERAL
101 PURPOSE: To limit carbon monoxide (CO), nitrogen oxides (NOx), sulfur oxides (SOX), volatile organic
compounds (VOCs), and particulate matter (PM) emissions from stationary reciprocating internal
combustion (IC) engines (RICE).

102 APPLICABILITY: The provisions of this rule apply to any single existing or new stationary spark or
compression-ignited reciprocating IC engine including stationary IC engines used in cogeneration, with a
rating of greater than 250 brake horsepower (bhp). The provisions of this rule also apply to a combination
of IC engines each with a rated brake horsepower greater than 50 bhp used at a single source, whose
maximum aggregate rated brake horsepower is greater than 250 bhp.
102.1 This rule applies to a spark-ignition engine or compression-ignition engine including stationary
RICE used in cogeneration, with a rated brake horsepower (rated bhp) of greater than 250. This
rule also applies to a combination of stationary RICE each with a rated bhp greater than 50 used at
a source, whose maximum aggregate rated bhp is greater than 250.
102.2 A stationary RICE subject to this rule that is also subject to the federal standards of performance
set forth in 40 CFR Part 60, Subpart IIII for compression-ignition engines or 40 CFR Part 60,
Subpart JJJJ for spark-ignition engines shall comply with the most stringent requirements.
Whenever more than one provision in this rule applies to such engine or whenever a provision in
this rule and a provision in the federal standards apply to such engine, the provision or
combination of provisions resulting in the lowest rate of emissions shall apply, unless otherwise
specifically exempted or designated.
102.3 NSPS & NESHAP: In addition to this rule, a stationary RICE may be subject to New Source
Performance Standards (NSPS) in Rule 360 and/or National Emission Standards for Hazardous
Air Pollutants (NESHAP) in Rule 370 of these rules. Whenever more than one provision in this
rule applies to such engine or whenever a provision in this rule and a provision in the federal
standards apply to such engine, the provision or combination of provisions resulting in the lowest
rate of emissions shall apply, unless otherwise specifically exempted or designated.
103 EXEMPTIONS: The following types of stationary IC engines are exempt from all of the requirements of
this rule but shall comply with Rule 300:
103.1 Any rotary engine, including gas turbines, jet engines.
103.2 An IC engine operated as a nonroad engine.
103.3 A laboratory IC engine used directly and exclusively for engine research including engine
development, and subsequent engine performance verification for the purpose of either engine
emission control techniques or engine efficiency improvements.
103.4 A prime engine when it is operated for purposes of performance verification and testing by the
owner or operator or by a manufacturer or distributor of such equipment for the purpose of
performance verification and testing at the production facility.
103.5 A compressed gas IC engine used for solar testing and research programs.
103.6 An IC engine operated as an emergency generator or other equipment at a nuclear power plant that
must run for safety reasons and/or operational tests to meet requirements imposed by the Nuclear
Regulatory Commission.
103.7 An IC engine test stand used for evaluating engine performance. ; and
103.8 An IC engine used for training purposes as long as the total number of hours of the operation does
not exceed 100 hours per calendar year per engine.
103.1 The following types of stationary RICE are exempt from all of the requirements of this rule but
shall comply with Rule 300 (Visible Emissions) of these rules:
a. A rotary engine, including gas turbines, jet engines.
b. A stationary RICE used directly and exclusively for engine research including engine
development, and subsequent engine performance verification for the purpose of either engine
emission control techniques or engine efficiency improvements.
c. A non-emergency engine when it is operated for purposes of performance verification and
testing by the owner or operator or by a manufacturer or distributor of such equipment for the
purpose of performance verification and testing at the production facility.

d. A compressed gas stationary RICE used for solar testing and research programs.
e. A stationary RICE operated as an emergency engine or other equipment at a nuclear power
plant that must run for safety reasons and/or operational tests to meet requirements imposed
by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
f. A stationary RICE test stand used for evaluating engine performance.
g. A stationary RICE used for training purposes as long as the total number of hours of the
operation does not exceed 100 hours per calendar year per engine.
103.2 An IC engine operated as a nonroad IC engine is exempt from all of the requirements of this rule
but shall comply with Rule 300 (Visible Emissions) of these rules.
104 PARTIAL EXEMPTIONS FOR EMERGENCY ENGINES: Any A stationary IC engine RICE
operated as an emergency engine, as defined in this rule, for any of the following reasons is exempt from
all of the provisions of this rule, except for the provisions in Sections 301, 303, and subsections 502.1 and
502.4: shall comply only with the provisions in Sections 301, 303, 306, 307, 400, 502.1 and 502.4 of this
rule when:
104.1 Used only for power when normal power service fails from the serving utility or if onsite electrical
transmission or onsite power generation equipment fails.
104.2 Used only for the emergency pumping of water resulting from a flood, fire, lightning strikes,
police action or for any other essential public services which affect the public health and safety.
104.3 Used for lighting airport runways.
104.4 Used for sewage overflow mitigation and/or prevention.
104.5 Used for reliability-related activities such as engine readiness, calibration, or maintenance or to
prevent the occurrence of an unsafe condition during electrical system maintenance, as long as the
total number of hours of the operation does not exceed 100 hours per calendar year per engine as
evidenced by an installed non-resettable hour meter.
104.6 Used as the prime non-emergency engine when the prime non-emergency engine has failed, but only
for such time as is needed to repair the prime non-emergency engine. ; or
104.7 Used to operate standby emergency water pumps for fire control that activate when sensors detect
low water pressure.
105 PARTIAL EXEMPTIONS FOR LOW USAGE NON-EMERGENCY, LOW USAGE PRIME
ENGINES: The following low usage non-emergency engines , low usage prime engines are exempt from all
of the provisions of this rule except for the provisions in Sections 301, 303, and subsections 502.1 and
502.4: shall comply only with the provisions in Sections 301, 303, 306, 307, 400, 502.1 and 502.4 of this rule
for:
105.1 Each engine with a rated bhp at or below 1000 bhp that operates less than 200 hours in any 12-
consecutive-month period per calendar year as evidenced by an installed non-resettable hour meter.
105.2 Each engine with a rated bhp above 1000 bhp that operates less than 100 hours in any 12-
consecutive-month period per calendar year as evidenced by an installed non-resettable hour meter.
106 PARTIAL EXEMPTION FOR NON-EMERGENCY ENGINES SUBJECT TO 40 CFR PART 63,
SUBPART ZZZZ: A stationary RICE subject to the federal standards of performance set forth in 40 CFR
Part 63, Subpart ZZZZ shall comply only with the provisions in Sections 502.1, 502.2, and 502.3 of this
rule.
SECTION 200 – DEFINITIONS: For the purpose of this rule, the following definitions shall apply, in addition to
those definitions found in Rule 100 (General Provisions and Definitions) of these rules. In the event of any inconsistency
between any of the Maricopa County Air Pollution Control Rules, the definitions in this rule take precedence. See Rule
100 (General Provisions and Definitions) of these rules for definitions of terms that are used but not specifically defined
in this rule.

201 AFTERCOOLER / INTERCOOLER: A system that cools the engine intake air or air/fuel mixture after the
air exits the turbocharger and prior to the introduction into the cylinder, thereby lowering NOx emissions.
202 COGENERATION UNIT: Internal combustion engine unit A stationary RICE unit that burns fuel to
simultaneously produce electricity and heat in a single thermodynamic process and is usually located in close
proximity to the equipment requiring the heat energy.
203 COMPRESSION-IGNITION ENGINE: A reciprocating internal combustion engine A stationary RICE with
operating characteristics wherein the principal mechanism of igniting the fuel and air mixture in the cylinders is
the compression of air in the cylinder until it is so hot that any fuel injected into the air or mixed with the air
ignites. In this type of engine, a separate ignition source, such as a spark plug, is not used.
204 DIESEL ENGINE: A type of compression-ignited IC engine compression-ignition engine.
205 EMERGENCY ENGINE: Any stationary standby IC engine A stationary RICE whose sole function is to
provide back-up power when electric power from the local utility is interrupted or when operated solely for any
of the reasons listed in Section 104 of this rule. An emergency engine, for the purposes of this rule, shall not be
used to supply standby power due to a voluntary reduction in power by a utility or power company, supply
power for distribution or sale to the grid, or supply power at a source in order to avoid peak demand charges
or high electric energy prices during on-peak price periods and shall not exceed 500 hours of operation per
calendar year including the 100 hours listed in subsection Section 104.5 of this rule.
206 ENGINE FAMILY: A group of engines stationary RICE with similar design features such as fuel type,
cooling medium, method of air aspiration, combustion chamber design including cylinder bore and stroke,
exhaust after treatment (if any), method of fuel admission, and method of control. These engines are also
expected to have similar emission and operating characteristics throughout their useful lives.
207 EQUIVALENT REPLACEMENT ENGINE: An engine A stationary RICE that is substituted for a another
stationary IC engine RICE that is intended to perform the same or similar function as the
original engine stationary RICE and where all of the following conditions exist:
207.1 The equivalent replacement engine results in equal or lower air contaminant emissions than
the existing engine original stationary RICE; and
207.2 The equivalent replacement engine meets the emission control technology standards contained
in either Table 1 or Table 2 Section 304 of this rule; and
207.3 The rated bhp of the equivalent replacement engine does not exceed the rated bhp of the existing
engine original stationary RICE (or sum of existing engines original stationary RICE) by more than 20
percent, for the purpose of this rule. For every percentage point increase of the rated brake
horsepower bhp, there shall be an associated decrease in emissions of nitrogen oxides, expressed as a
mass per unit time, equal to or exceeding two percentage points.
208 EXISTING ENGINE: An engine that commenced operation prior to October 22, 2003 or an engine on which
the construction or modification has commenced prior to October 22, 2003, including the contractual obligation
to undertake and complete an order for an engine.
209 208 IDENTICAL REPLACEMENT ENGINE: An engine that is substituted for an existing stationary IC engine
that has the same manufacturer type, model number, manufacturer’s maximum rated capacity (bhp), and that is
intended to perform the same or similar function as the original stationary IC engine that it replaces and has
equal or lower emissions or meets the emission control technology requirements in Section 304, Table 1, 2, or
3. A stationary RICE that is substituted for another stationary RICE that is intended to perform the same or
similar function as the original stationary RICE and where all of the following conditions exist:
208.1 The identical replacement engine results in equal or lower air contaminant emissions than the original
stationary RICE; and
208.2 The identical replacement engine meets the emission control technology standards contained in
Section 304 of this rule; and
208.3 The identical replacement engine has the same manufacturer type, model number, and manufacturer’s
rated bhp as the original stationary RICE.

210 INTERNAL COMBUSTION (IC) ENGINE, NONROAD:
210.1 An IC engine:
a. In or on a piece of equipment that is self-propelled or serves a dual purpose by both propelling
itself and performing another function (such as garden tractors, off-highway mobile cranes
and bulldozers); or
b. In or on a piece of equipment that is intended to be propelled while performing its function
(such as lawnmowers and string trimmers); or
c. That, by itself or in or on a piece of equipment, is portable or transportable, meaning designed
to be and capable of being carried or moved from one location to another. Indicia of
transportability include but are not limited to, wheels, skids, carrying handles, dollies, trailers,
or platforms.
210.2 An internal combustion engine is not a nonroad engine if:
a. The engine used to propel a motor vehicle or a vehicle used solely for competition, or is
subject to standards promulgated under Section 202 of the Clean Air Act; or
b. The engine regulated by a federal New Source Performance Standard promulgated under
Section 111 of the Clean Air Act; or
c. The engine otherwise included in paragraph (c) above of this definition remains or will
remain at a location for more than 12 consecutive months or a shorter period of time for an
engine located at a seasonal source. A location is any single site at a building, structure,
facility, or installation. Any engine (or engines) that replace(s) an engine at a location and that
is intended to perform the same or similar function as the engine replaced will be included in
calculating the consecutive time period. An engine located at a seasonal source is an engine
that remains at a seasonal source during the full annual operating period of the seasonal
source. A seasonal source is a stationary source that remains in a single location on a
permanent basis (i.e. at least two years) and that operates at that single location approximately
three months (or more) each year. This paragraph does not apply to an engine after the engine
is removed from the location.
211 INTERNAL COMBUSTION (IC) ENGINE, STATIONARY : Any reciprocating, piston-driven IC engine
that is operated or intended to be operated at one specific location for more than 12 consecutive months or
that is attached to a foundation at the location. Any engine that replaces an engine at a location and is
intended to perform the same or similar function as the engine being replaced will be included in
calculating the consecutive time period. A stationary IC engine is not a nonroad engine.
212 209 LEAN-BURN ENGINE: A spark-ignited engine A spark-ignition engine with an air-to-fuel operating
range that has more air present than is needed to burn the fuel present and cannot be adjusted to operate
with an exhaust oxygen concentration of less than or equal to 2%.
213 210 LOCATION: Any single site at a building, structure, facility or installation.
214 LOW SULFUR OIL: Fuel oil containing less than or equal to 0.05 % sulfur by weight.
215 NEW ENGINE: An engine that is not an existing engine.
211 NON-EMERGENCY ENGINE: A stationary RICE that is dedicated to a process or processes for the
purpose of supplying primary mechanical or electrical power.
212 NONROAD INTERNAL COMBUSTION (IC) ENGINE:
212.1 Equipment that meets the following requirements are nonroad IC engines:
a. An internal combustion engine that is (or will be) used in or on a piece of equipment that is
self-propelled or serves a dual purpose by both propelling itself and performing another
function (such as garden tractors, off-highway mobile cranes and bulldozers); or

b. An internal combustion engine that is (or will be) used in or on a piece of equipment that is
intended to be propelled while performing its function (such as lawnmowers and string
trimmers); or
c. An internal combustion engine that by itself or in or on a piece of equipment is portable or
transportable, meaning designed to be and capable of being carried or moved from one
location to another. Indicia of transportability include but are not limited to, wheels, skids,
carrying handles, dollies, trailers, or platforms.
212.2 The following are not nonroad IC engines:
a. An engine used to propel a motor vehicle, an aircraft, or equipment used solely for
competition; or
b. An engine regulated by a federal New Source Performance Standard promulgated under
Section 111 of the Clean Air Act; or
c. An engine otherwise included in Section 212.1(c) of this rule that remains or will remain at a
location for more than 12 consecutive months or a shorter period of time for an engine located
at a seasonal source. A location is any single site at a building, structure, facility, or
installation. Any engine (or engines) that replace(s) an engine at a location and that is
intended to perform the same or similar function as the engine replaced will be included in
calculating the consecutive time period. An engine located at a seasonal source is an engine
that remains at a seasonal source during the full annual operating period of the seasonal
source. A seasonal source is a stationary source that remains in a single location on a
permanent basis (i.e. at least two years) and that operates at that single location approximately
three months (or more) each year. This paragraph does not apply to an engine after the engine
is removed from the location.
216 213 PART(S) PER MILLION, DRY VOLUME (PPMDV): A unit of proportion equal to 10-6 that is measured
on a dry basis (minus water) at 15% oxygen.
217 PRIME ENGINE: A principal or main use engine that is dedicated to a process or processes for the purpose of
supplying primary mechanical or electrical power. as opposed to an emergency engine.
218 214 RATED BRAKE HORSEPOWER (RATED BHP): The maximum brake horsepower (bhp) specified by
the engine manufacturer for the engine application, usually listed on the nameplate of the engine. If the engine
has been altered so that the maximum brake horsepower is different than the rated brake horsepower on the
nameplate, then the maximum brake horsepower shall be considered the rated brake horsepower.
219 215 RICH-BURN ENGINE: Any spark-ignited IC engine A spark-ignition engine that is not a lean-burn engine.
220 216 SPARK-IGNITION ENGINE: An IC engine A stationary RICE wherein the fuel is usually mixed with
intake air before introduction into the combustion chamber resulting in a relatively homogeneous air/fuel
mixture in the combustion chamber, at which time a spark plug, or other device, then ignites the air/fuel
mixture.
217 STATIONARY RECIPROCATING INTERNAL COMBUSTION ENGINE (RICE): A reciprocating,
piston-driven internal combustion engine that is operated or intended to be operated at one specific location
for more than 12 consecutive months or that is attached to a foundation at the location. An engine that
replaces an engine at a location and is intended to perform the same or similar function as the engine being
replaced will be included in calculating the consecutive time period. A stationary RICE is not a nonroad
engine.
221 218 SULFUR OXIDES (SOX): Oxides of sulfur calculated as equivalent sulfur dioxide.
219 ULTRA LOW SULFUR DIESEL: Fuel oil containing less than or equal to 0.0015 % sulfur by weight.
222 220 WASTE DERIVED FUEL GAS: Any A gaseous fuel that is generated from the biodegradation of solid or
liquid waste including, but not limited to, sewage sludge, digester gas and landfill gas.
SECTION 300 – STANDARDS:

301 LIMITATIONS FOR NEW AND EXISTING STATIONARY IC ENGINES STATIONARY RICE -
FUEL: An owner or operator of any an engine that meets the criteria listed in Section 102 of this rule shall
comply with either of the following:
301.1 Use any fuel that contains no more than 0.05% 0.0015% sulfur by weight, alone or in combination
with other fuels.
301.2 Use any waste derived fuel gas that contains no more than 0.08% sulfur by weight, alone or in
combination with other fuels.
302 GOOD COMBUSTION PRACTICES / TUNING PROCEDURE FOR STATIONARY RICE: An
owner or operator of an engine that meets the criteria listed in Section 102 of this rule shall conduct
preventative maintenance or tuning procedures as recommended by the engine manufacturer to ensure good
combustion practices to minimize NOx emissions. A handheld monitor may be used if so desired by the
owner or operator for measurement of NOx and CO and concentrations in the effluent stream after each
adjustment is made. This; this may assist in determining that the proper adjustment has been made
to ensure NOx and CO minimization minimize NOx and CO emissions. A handheld monitor may be used
by the Control Officer to determine compliance with this section. In lieu of a manufacturer’s procedure, a
different procedure specified by any other maintenance guideline may be used as a default procedure.
The owner or operator shall include all of the following in the tuning procedures procedure shall include all
of the following, if the engine is so equipped, and if such procedures are appropriate to the type of engine:
302.1 Lubricating Oil and Filter: Change once every three months or after no more than 300 hours of
operation, whichever occurs last.
302.2 Inlet Air Filter: Clean once every three months or after no more than 300 hours of operation and
replace every 1,000 hours of operation or every year, whichever occurs last.
302.3 Fuel Filter: Clean once every year or replace (if cartridge type) once every 1,000 hours of
operation, whichever occurs last.
302.4 Check and adjust the following once every year or after no more than 1,000 hours of operation,
whichever occurs last:
a. Intake and exhaust valves
b. Spark plugs (if so equipped)
c. Spark timing and dwell or fuel injection timing (if adjustable), and
d. Carburetor mixture (if adjustable).
302.5 Spark Plugs and Ignition Points: Replace after 3,000 hours of operation or every year whichever
occurs last
302.6 Coolant: Change after 3,000 hours of operation or every year whichever occurs last.
302.7 Exhaust System: Check for leaks and/or restrictions after 3,000 hours of operation or every year
whichever occurs last.
303 LIMITATIONS FOR STATIONARY RICE – OPACITY: No An owner or operator of an engine that
meets the criteria in Section 102 of this rule shall not discharge into the ambient air from any single source
of emissions such engine any air contaminant, other than uncombined water, in excess of 20% opacity.
304 ADDITIONAL LIMITATIONS FOR PRIME NON-EMERGENCY ENGINES > 250 RATED BHP
OR GREATER: In addition to meeting the standards in Sections 301, 302, and 303, each existing or new
prime engine greater than 250 rated bhp that is not listed in Sections 103, 104, or 105, shall comply with
the emission limits or control technology requirements listed in Section 304, Table 1, 2, or 3, dependent
upon the type of engine. In addition to meeting the standards in Sections 301, 302 and 303 of this rule, an
owner or operator of a non-emergency engine that meets the criteria in Section 102 of this rule shall
comply with Sections 304.1 or 304.2 of this rule.

304.1 Engine Requirements for Non-Emergency Engines: The emissions in parts per million by dry
volume (ppmdv) or grams per bhp (g/bhp) from the non-emergency engines shall comply with
either Table 1 or Table 2 of this rule.
TABLE 1
COMPRESSION-IGNITION ENGINES
MANUFACTURED OR MODIFIED RATED BHP ENGINE REQUIREMENTS
770 ppmdv or 10 g/bhp-hr. NOX or turbocharger
with aftercooler/intercooler or 4-degree injection
Prior to October 22, 2003 250-399 timing retard
550 ppmdv or 7.2 g/bhp-hr. NOX or
turbocharger with aftercooler/intercooler or 4-
Prior to October 22, 2003 400 plus degree injection timing retard
530 ppmdv or 6.9 g/bhp-hr. NOX or
turbocharger with aftercooler/intercooler or 4-
On or after October 22, 2003 but prior to degree injection timing retard; 1,000 ppmdv CO;
July 11, 2005 >250 0.40 g/bhp-hr PM
TABLE 2
SPARK-IGNITION ENGINES
LEAN-BURN ENGINES
OXIDES OF CARBON
MANUFACTURED OR RATED NITROGEN VOLATILE ORGANIC MONOXIDE
MODIFIED BHP (NOX) COMPOUND (VOC) (CO)
280 ppmdv or
Prior to October 22, 2003 >250 4.0 g/bhp-hr 800 ppmdv or 5.0 g/bhp-hr 4,500 ppmdv
On or after October 22,
2003 but prior to June 12, 110 ppmdv or
2006 >250 1.5 g/bhp-hr 800 ppmdv or 5.0 g/bhp-hr 4,500 ppmdv
RICH-BURN ENGINES
OXIDES OF CARBON
MANUFACTURED OR RATED NITROGEN VOLATILE ORGANIC MONOXIDE
MODIFIED BHP (NOX) COMPOUND (VOC) (CO)
280 ppmdv or
4.0 g/bhp-hr or
three-way 800 ppmdv or 5.0 g/bhp-hr 4,500 ppmdv or
Prior to October 22, 2003 >250 catalyst* or three-way catalyst* three-way catalyst*
20 ppmdv or
On or after October 22, 0.30 g/bhp-hr
2003 but prior to June 12, or three-way 800 ppmdv or 5.0 g/bhp-hr 4,500 ppmdv or
2006 >250 catalyst* or three-way catalyst* three-way catalyst*
* The three-way catalyst shall provide a minimum of 80% control efficiency for NOx and CO for those engines fueled with natural gas,
propane or gasoline. In addition, the three-way catalyst shall also provide a minimum of at least 50% control efficiency for VOC for those
engines fueled by gasoline.
NOX EMISSION LIMITS OR CONTROL TECHNOLOGY REQUIREMENTS FOR EXISTING COMPRESSION-
IGNITION ENGINES > 250 bhp
TABLE 1

RATED BRAKE HORSEPOWER ENGINE REQUIREMENTS
(bhp)
250-399 770 ppmdv or 10 g/bhp-hr. NOx or turbocharger with
aftercooler/intercooler or 4-degree injection timing retard
400 plus 550 ppmdv or 7.2 g/bhp-hr. NOx or turbocharger with
aftercooler/intercooler or 4-degree injection timing retard
EMISSION LIMITS OR CONTROL TECHNOLOGY REQUIREMENTS FOR EXISTING APPLICABLE
SPARK-IGNITION ENGINES > 250 RATED BHP
TABLE 2
OXIDES OF NITROGEN VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUND CARBON MONOXIDE
(NOX) (VOC) (CO)
280 ppmdv or 4.0 b/bhp-hr 800 ppmdv or 5.0 g/bhp-hr or three-way 4,500 ppmdv or three-way catalyst*
or three-way catalyst* catalyst*
EMISSION LIMITS FOR NEW SPARK OR COMPRESSION-IGNITION ENGINES > 250 BHP
TABLE 3
ENGINE NOx PM* CO
TYPE
LEAN 110 ppmdv or 1.5 g/bhp-hr. Not Applicable 4,500 ppmdv
BURN
(SPARK)
RICH 20 ppmdv or 0.30 g/bhp-hr. Not Applicable 4,500 ppmdv
BURN
(SPARK)
COMPRES 530 ppmdv or 6.9 g/bhp-hr. 0.40 g/bhp-hr 1,000 ppmdv
SION
* A backhalf analysis shall be performed using reference Method 202 (referenced in subsection 504.6) each time a compliance
test for particulate matter emissions to meet the limitations listed in Table 3 is performed using Method 5. The results of the
Method 202 testing shall be used for emissions inventory purposes.
304.2 Federal Standards of Performance for Non-Emergency Engines: An owner or operator of an
engine listed in Sections 304.2(a) or (b) of this rule shall comply with the federal standards of
performance for compression-ignition engines set forth in 40 CFR Part 60, Subpart IIII or spark-
ignition engines set forth in 40 CFR Part 60, Subpart JJJJ and in all accompanying appendices as
incorporated by reference in Rule 360 (New Source Performance Standards) of these rules.
Whenever more than one provision in this rule applies to such engine or whenever a provision in
this rule and a provision in the federal standards apply to such engine, the provision or
combination of provisions resulting in the lowest rate of emissions shall apply, unless otherwise
specifically exempted or designated.
a. 40 CFR Part 60, Subpart IIII applies to all of the following non-emergency compression-
ignition engines:
(1) Any stationary compression-ignition IC engine that was ordered after July 11, 2005 and
manufactured after April 1, 2006.
(2) Any stationary compression-ignition IC engine that was modified or reconstructed after
July 11, 2005.
b. 40 CFR Part 60, Subpart JJJJ applies to the following non-emergency spark-ignition engine:

(1) Any stationary spark-ignition engine that was ordered after June 12, 2006 and
manufactured on or after:
(a) July 1, 2007 for engines with a rated bhp greater than or equal to 500 (except lean
burn engines with a rated bhp greater than or equal to 500 and less than 1,350)
(b) January 1, 2008 for lean burn engines with a rated bhp greater than or equal to 500
and less than 1,350
(c) July 1, 2008 for engines with a rated bhp less than 500.
(2) Any stationary spark-ignition engine that was modified or reconstructed after June 12,
2006.
305 EFFICIENCY ALLOWANCE: Each emission limit expressed in Tables 1, 2 or 3 1 or 2 of this rule may
be multiplied by X, where X equals the engine efficiency (E) divided by a reference efficiency of 30
percent. Engine efficiency shall be determined by one of the following methods whichever is higher:
a. E = (Engine Output) X (100) ÷ (Energy Input) where Energy Input is determined by a fuel measuring
device accurate to +/- 5 % and is based upon the higher heating value (HHV) of the fuel. Percent
efficiency (E) shall be averaged over 15 consecutive minutes and measured at peak load for the
applicable engine.
b. E = (Manufacturers Rated Efficiency [Continuous] at (LHV) X (LHV) ÷ (HHV) where LHV = the
lower heating value of the fuel Engine efficiency (E) shall not be less than 30 percent; an engine with
an efficiency lower than 30 percent shall be assigned an efficiency of 30 percent for the purposes of
this rule.
306 EQUIVALENT REPLACEMENT ENGINE OR IDENTICAL REPLACEMENT
ENGINE REPLACEMENT: An equivalent or identical replacement engine that replaces an existing engine
shall be treated as an existing engine for the purposes of compliance with this rule, unless the engine
commenced operation or was constructed or modified after October 22, 2003, including the contractual
obligation to undertake and complete an order for an engine, and then it will be considered a new engine for
purposes of meeting the standards for a new engine in this rule. An equivalent replacement engine or an
identical replacement engine shall be treated as the original stationary RICE that it replaces for the purposes of
compliance with this rule.
307 MODIFICATION TO A STATIONARY RICE: If a modification, including the contractual obligation to
undertake and complete an order for an engine, is made to a stationary RICE, then such engine shall comply
with all applicable provisions of this rule. The date of the modification shall be the trigger for when the
modification is subject to the provisions of Section 304 of this rule. Whenever a provision in this rule and a
provision in Section 304 of this rule apply to such engine, the provision or combination of provisions
resulting in the lowest rate of emissions shall apply, unless otherwise specifically exempted or designated.
308 NON-RESETTING TOTALIZING HOUR METER: The owner or operator of a stationary RICE,
subject to any provision of this rule, except for those engines being removed from service under Section
401 of this rule, shall install, operate, and maintain a non-resetting totalizing hour meter. If the non-
resetting totalizing hour meter is found to be malfunctioning, operation of the engine shall cease until
corrective action(s) can be implemented or the function of the meter is restored.
SECTION 400 - ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS
401 COMPLIANCE SCHEDULE-STATIONARY RICE BEING REMOVED FROM SERVICE: An
owner or operator of an existing a stationary IC engine that must be replaced with a new engine to meet
emission limits listed in Section 300 shall be in compliance with the emission limits listed in Section 304,
Table 3 by October 22, 2007. If a stationary RICE must be removed from service because such engine does
not comply with the emission limits listed in Section 300 of this rule, then the stationary RICE shall be
removed from service no later than 12 months after [Date of Adoption]. The stationary RICE that replaces
such engine shall comply with all applicable provisions of this rule and shall comply with Section 304 of
this rule upon installation.

402 COMPLIANCE SCHEDULE-NON-RESETTING TOTALIZING HOUR METER: The owner or
operator of a stationary RICE, subject to any provision of this rule, except for those engines being removed
from service under Section 401 of this rule, shall install, operate, and maintain a non-resetting totalizing
hour meter on each such engine no later than 12 months after [Date of Adoption].
SECTION 500 - MONITORING AND RECORDS
501 COMPLIANCE DETERMINATION:
501.1 Existing Engines: Existing IC engines or engine families shall demonstrate compliance with
Section 300 by recordkeeping according to Section 502. Emission testing using the applicable test
methods listed in Section 500 shall be performed if the Control Officer requests.
501.2 Existing Engine Families at a Source: When testing an engine family at one source, the number of
engines tested should be the greater of either one engine or one third of all identical engines in the
group. If any of the representative engines exceed the emission limits, each engine in the group
shall demonstrate compliance by emissions testing.
501.3 New Engines / New Engine Families: Compliance with the limitations listed in Section 304, Table
3 shall be demonstrated by either:
a. A statement from the manufacturer that the engine meets the most stringent emissions
standards found in 40 CFR Part 89 or 90 applicable to the engine and its model year at the time
of manufacture, or
b. Performance of emission testing using the test methods listed in Section 503.
501.1 Stationary RICE: An owner or operator of a stationary RICE shall demonstrate compliance with
all of the following, as applicable:
a. With Section 300 of this rule, by recordkeeping according to Section 502 of this rule.
Emission testing using the applicable test methods listed in Section 503 of this rule shall be
performed upon the request of the Control Officer.
b. With Section 304.2 of this rule, by one of the following:
(1) A statement from the manufacturer that the engine meets the most stringent emissions
standards found in this rule or 40 CFR Parts 89, 90, and 1039 applicable to the engine
and its model year at the time of manufacture.
(2) Emission testing using the applicable test methods listed in Section 503 of this rule shall
be performed upon the request of the Control Officer.
c. With 40 CFR Part 60.4213, for a stationary RICE with a displacement of greater than or equal
to 30 liters per cylinder.
501.2 Engine Family: An owner or operator of an engine family shall demonstrate compliance with all
of the following, as applicable:
a. With Section 300 of this rule, by recordkeeping according to Section 502 of this rule.
Emission testing using the applicable test methods listed in Section 503 of this rule shall be
performed upon the request of the Control Officer.
b. When testing an engine family at one source, the number of engines tested should be the
greater of either one engine or one third of all identical engines in the group. If any of the
representative engines exceed the emission limits, each engine in the group shall demonstrate
compliance by emissions testing.
c. With Section 304.2 of this rule, by one of the following:
(1) A statement from the manufacturer that the engine meets the most stringent emissions
standards found in this rule or 40 CFR Parts 89, 90, and 1039 applicable to the engine
and its model year at the time of manufacture.

(2) Emission testing using the applicable test methods listed in Section 503 of this rule shall
be performed upon the request of the Control Officer.
d. With 40 CFR Part 60.4213, for an engine family with a displacement of greater than or equal
to 30 liters per cylinder.
501.4 501.3 Low Sulfur Oil Ultra Low Sulfur Diesel Verification: If the Control Officer requests proof of the
sulfur content, the owner or operator shall submit fuel receipts, contract specifications, pipeline
meter tickets, Material Safety Data Sheets (MSDS), fuel supplier information or purchase records,
if applicable, from the fuel supplier, indicating the sulfur content of the fuel oil. In lieu of these,
testing of the fuel oil for sulfur content to meet the 0.05% limit shall be permitted if so desired by
the owner or operator for evidence of compliance. If the Control Officer requests documentation
of the sulfur content of the fuel oil to demonstrate the 0.0015% limits, the owner or operator shall
submit one of the following:
a. Fuel receipts, or
b. Contract specifications, or
c. Pipeline meter tickets, or
d. Fuel supplier information, or
e. Purchase records, or
f. Testing of the fuel oil for sulfur content
The items listed above must provide accurate sulfur content values or be based on enforceable test
methods as approved by the Administrator to determine the sulfur content.
501.5 501.4 Waste Derived Fuel Gas - Sulfur Verification: The owner or operator shall submit
documentation of the concentration of the sulfur level of the waste derived fuel gas to the Control
Officer upon request. The sulfur content of gaseous fuels shall be determined by South Coast Air
Quality Management District Method 307-94 Determination of Sulfur in a Gaseous Matrix.
501.6 501.5 Test Method Conditions: The owner or operator shall use the test methods listed in Section 503
of this rule to determine compliance with the limitations listed in Section 304, Tables 1-3 1 or 2 of
this rule. Testing for stationary IC engines stationary RICE shall be completed under steady state
conditions at either the maximum operating load or no less than 80% of the rated brake horsepower
rating bhp. If the owner or operator of an engine demonstrates to the Control Officer that the engine
cannot operate at these conditions, then emissions source testing shall be performed at the highest
achievable continuous brake horsepower rating rated bhp or under the typical duty cycle or typical
operational mode of the engine.
502 RECORDKEEPING / RECORDS RETENTION: The owner or operator of any stationary IC engine a
stationary RICE subject to this rule shall comply with the following requirements and keep retain records for a
period of at least 5 years:
502.1 Records Required for a Stationary RICE: An owner or operator of any IC engine a stationary
RICE, including emergency engines, prime engines non-emergency engines and low usage
engines low usage non-emergency engines, shall keep a record that includes an initial one time entry
that lists the particular engine combustion type (compression-ignition or spark-ignition or
rich burn, or lean burn); manufacturer; model designation, rated brake horsepower bhp, serial
number and where the engine is located on the site.
502.2 Monthly Records Required for Non-Emergency Engines: An owner or operator of a prime
engine non-emergency engine shall maintain a monthly record for prime engines non-emergency
engines which shall include:
a. Hours of operation; and
b. Type of fuel used, and

c. Documentation verifying compliance with sulfur fuel content according
to subsection Section 301.1 of this rule.
502.3 Annual Records Required for Non-Emergency Engines: An owner or operator of a prime
engine non-emergency engine shall maintain an annual record of good combustion procedures
according to Section 302. the practices/procedure that are followed in order to comply with Section
302 (Good Combustion Practices/Tuning Procedure for Stationary RICE) of this rule.
502.4 Records Required for An Emergency Engine or a Low Usage Non-Emergency Engine: An
owner or operator of an emergency engine and or a low usage non-emergency, low usage engine that
meets the exemptions listed in Sections 104 and 105 of this rule shall keep an engine record that
includes:
a. Monthly rolling twelve month total of hours of operation, including hours of operation for
testing, reliability and maintenance; and
b. Fuel type and sulfur content of fuel; and
c. Explanation for the use of the engine if it is used as an emergency engine.
503 COMPLIANCE DETERMINATION-TEST METHODS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE: The
following test methods are approved for use for the purpose of determining compliance with this rule. The test
methods The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) test methods as they exist in the Code of Federal
Regulations (CFR) (July 1, 2004) and the American Society of Testing Materials International Methods as
listed below, are incorporated by reference in Appendix G of the Maricopa County Rules and
Regulations Maricopa County Air Pollution Control Regulations. The When more than one test method is
permitted for the same determination, as listed in subsections 503.12, 503.13, 503.14, or 503.15, an
exceedance of the limits established in this rule determined by any of the applicable test methods constitutes a
violation. Alternative test methods as approved by the Administrator or other EPA-approved test methods
may be used upon written approval from the Control Officer. When more than one test method is permitted
for the same determination, an exceedance under any method will constitute a violation. Copies of test
methods referenced in this section of this rule are available at the Maricopa County Environmental Services
Department Air Quality Department, 1001 North Central Avenue, Suite 201 125, Phoenix, Arizona, 85004-
1942.
503.1 EPA Reference Methods 1 (“Sample and Velocity Traverses for Stationary Sources”) and 1A
(“Sample and Velocity Traverses for Stationary Sources with Small Stacks and Ducts”) (40 CFR
60, Appendix A).
503.2 EPA Reference Methods 2 (“Determination of Stack Gas Velocity and Volumetric Flow Rate”),
2A (“Direct Measurement of Gas Volume Through Pipes and Small Ducts”), 2C (“Determination
of Stack Gas Velocity and Volumetric Flow Rate in Small Stacks or Ducts”), and 2D
(“Measurement of Gas Volumetric Flow Rates in Small Pipes and Ducts”) (40 CFR 60, Appendix
A).
503.3 EPA Reference Methods 3 (“Gas Analysis for the Determination of Dry Molecular Weight”), 3A
(“Determination of Oxygen and Carbon Dioxide Concentrations in Emissions from Stationary
Sources (Instrumental Analyzer Procedure"), 3B (“Gas Analysis for the Determination of
Emission Rate Correction Factor of Excess Air”), and 3C (“Determination of Carbon Dioxide,
Methane, Nitrogen and Oxygen from Stationary Sources”) (40 CFR 60, Appendix A).
503.4 EPA Reference Method 4 (“Determination of Moisture Content in Stack Gases”) (40 CFR 60,
Appendix A).
503.5 EPA Reference Method 5 (“Determination of Particulate Emissions from Stationary Sources”) (40
CFR 60, Appendix A)
503.6 EPA Reference Method 202 (“Determination of Condensable Particulate Emissions from
Stationary Sources”) (40 CFR 51, Appendix M).
503.7 EPA Reference Methods 7 (“Determination of Nitrogen Oxide Emissions from Stationary
Sources”), 7A (“Determination of Nitrogen Oxide Emissions form Stationary Sources - Ion

chromatographic method”), 7B (“Determination of Nitrogen Oxide Emissions from Stationary
Sources – Ultraviolet Spectrometry”), 7C (“Determination of Nitrogen Oxide Emissions from
Stationary Sources – Alkaline-Permanganate Colorimetric Method”), 7D (“Determination of
Nitrogen Oxide Emissions from Stationary Sources – Alkaline – Permanganate Chromatographic
Method”), and 7E (“Determination of Nitrogen Oxide Emissions from Stationary Sources –
Instrumental Analyzer Method“), (40 CFR 60, Appendix A).
503.8 EPA Reference Method 9 (“Visual Determination of the Opacity of Emissions from Stationary
Sources”) (40 CFR 60, Appendix A).
503.9 EPA Reference Method 10 (“Determination of Carbon Monoxide from Stationary Sources”) (40
CFR 60, Appendix A).
503.10 EPA Reference Method 18 (“Measurement of Gaseous Organic Compound Emissions by Gas
Chromatography”) (40 CFR 60, Appendix A).
503.11 EPA Reference Method 25A (“Determination of Total Gaseous Organic Concentration Using a
Flame Ionization Analyzer”) (40 CFR 60, Appendix A).
503.12 American Society of Testing Materials International, ASTM Method D1266-98 (“Standard Test
Method for Sulfur in Petroleum Products (Lamp Method)”) , 1998.
503.13 503.12 American Society of Testing Materials International, ASTM Method D2622-98 (“Standard Test
Method for Sulfur in Petroleum Products by Wavelength Dispersive X-Ray Fluorescence
Spectrometry”), 1998.
503.14 503.13 American Society of Testing Materials International, ASTM Method D2880-71 D2880-96, 78 or
96 (“Standard Specification for Gas Turbine Fuel Oils”), 1971 or 1978 or 1996.
503.15 503.14 American Society of Testing Materials International, ASTM Method D4294-98 D4294-02 or
D4294-03 (“Standard Test Method for Sulfur in Petroleum Products by Energy-Dispersive X-Ray
Fluoresence Spectroscopy”) 1990 or 1998.
503.16 503.15 American Society of Testing Materials International, ASTM Method D5504-01 or D5504-
08 (“Standard Test Method for Determination of Sulfur Compounds in Natural Gas and Gaseous
Fuels by Gas Chromatography and Chemiluminescence), 2006.
504.16 South Coast Air Quality Management District Method 307-94 Determination of Sulfur in a
Gaseous Matrix

Return to list of attachments
MARICOPA COUNTY BOARD OF HEALTH MEETING MINUTES
Monday, April 25, 2016
301 W. Jefferson Street, 10th Floor
Phoenix, Arizona 85003
Board of Supervisors Conference Room
President Kip Steill called the meeting to order at 3:09 p.m.
ROLL CALL:
Members Present: Members Excused:
Don Cassano Scott Somers
Nedra Halley Francisca Montoya
Andrew Kunasek
Debra Baldauff
Kip Steill
Don Hughes
Robert MacMillan
Michael Mills, M.D. (via phone)
Ex-Officio: Bob England, M.D.
CALL TO THE PUBLIC:
Mr. Kip Steill announced it was time for a call to the public and requested public comment forms
for those who wanted to speak or who wanted to address any action items.
Supervisor Kunasek introduced the newest Board of Health member, Mr. MacMillan.
DISCUSSION/ACTION ITEMS
1. Election of Board of Health Vice President:
Mr. Don Hughes was nominated as Vice President of the Board of Health. A motion was made by
Mr. Don Cassano and seconded by Ms. Nedra Halley and all were in favor. The motion passed
unanimously.
2. Approval of Minutes: President Steill asked for a motion to approve the minutes from the BOH
Meeting held on January 25, 2016. Motion was made by Ms. Nedra Halley to approve the BOH
minutes as presented. Motion was seconded by Mr. Don Cassano and the motion passed
unanimously.
3. Approval of Public Health FY 17 OMB Budget Recommendation Mr. Scot Pitcairn
The Board of Health Finance Committee recommended that the Board of Health approve Public
Health’s FY 17 OMB Budget Recommendation. Mr. Pitcairn was available to answer any questions
that the Board of Health had. Motion was made by Mr. Don Hughes to approve Public Health’s FY
17 OMB budget recommendation. Motion was seconded by Mr. Don Cassano and the motion
passed unanimously.
4. Approval of Environmental Services FY 17 OMB Budget Recommendation Ms. Diane Cabanillas
The Board of Health Finance Committee recommended that the Board of Health approve
Environmental Services’ FY 17 OMB Budget Recommendation. Ms. Cabanillas was available to
answer any questions that the Board of Health had. Motion was made by Mr. Don Hughes to
1

approve Environmental Services FY 17 OMB budget recommendation. Motion was seconded by Mr.
Halley and the motion passed unanimously.
5. Approval of the initiation of regulatory change for the ozone-related Mr. Philip A. McNeely
rulemakings
The rules being revised regarding ozone are the following:
Rule 241: Minor New Source Review
Rule 322: Power Plant Operations
Rule 323: Fuel Burning Equipment from Industrial/Commercial/Institutional Sources
Rule 324: Stationary Internal Combustion (IC) Engines
Rule 336: Surface Coating Operations
Rule 342: Coating Wood Furniture and Fixtures
Rule 350: Storage of Organic Liquids at Bulk Plants and Terminals
Rule 351: Loading of Organic Liquids
Rule 352: Gasoline Delivery Vessel Testing and Use
Rule 353: Gasoline In Stationary Dispensing Tanks
These rules are being closed for public comment and will be published May 13th. If there is no
further comment, the rules will go to the Board of Supervisors for a hearing. These rules are in
regards to non-attainment for the ozone standards. These rules are due to the EPA January 1, 2017
and have gone through the EROP/stakeholder meeting process. Every facility that has a permit will
receive information when rule changes are occurring via email. For more information on the
regulatory process: http://www.maricopa.gov/regulations/default.aspx
Motion was made by Mr. Don Cassano to approve the initiation of regulatory change for the
ozone-related rulemakings. Motion was seconded by Ms. Nedra Halley and the motion passed
unanimously.
6. Fee Waiver Applications Mr. Ken Conklin
Mr. Ken Conklin presented thirty-two (32) fee waivers for review and consideration of approval. A
summary sheet document was provided.
Motion to approve the 32 Fee Waiver applications was made by Ms. Nedra Halley, seconded by
Mr. Don Cassano and all were in favor. Motion passed unanimously.
Discussion Items:
1. Public Health Report: Dr. Bob England
i. Human Resources
ii. Communication
iii. Infrastructure
iv. Strategic Planning
v. Programs
vi. Disease Update
vii. Future Topics
Dr. Bob provided the Board of Health with the updated Public Health org chart. The re-org has
aligned MCDPH into programmatic divisions. Previously, MCDPH was organized by funding stream.
Dr. Bob briefed the board on funding cuts that the department is receiving, including a $300,000
cut to WIC and $230,000 cut to the Office of Preparedness and Response (CDC is pulling some
money back for the Zika response). WIC is struggling to meet a target number of clients but each
time the program doesn’t meet the target, the number of target clients and funding is decreased.
The reason for difficulties with reaching the target number of client is that client encounter has
2

become increasingly more complex. The Office of Vital Records is moving their St. Mary’s Food
Bank location to a location near the 1-17 and Dunlap. MCDPH is no longer tracking returning
travelers from ebola stricken countries. Arizona has experienced the highest level of severity in the
country for flu for hospitalization and death rates. CDC is gathering data but there may not be
enough lab evidence to determine a cause. Zika virus is another of the flaviviruses that is associated
with significant neurological defects in infants whose mothers were infected with the virus in the
first two trimesters of pregnancy. The primary vector is Aedes Aegypti mosquitos. In Maricopa
County, there is no endemic spread of zika; only one travel associated case. The strategy when
there is a travel associated case is to have the individual stay inside, wear repellant, and when
necessary, have Environmental Services do traps and remediation depending on consent. There is
concern regarding the process and timeline it would take to enter private property if necessary to
spray for this type of mosquito. The Surgeon General will be visiting Arizona in May to do a tour on
opioid use. The NACCHO Annual meeting will be July 19 – 21 in Phoenix.
ANNOUNCEMENTS AND CURRENT EVENTS
 Next meeting is July 25, 2016
ADJOURNMENT: There being no further business, motion to adjourn the meeting was made by Mr.
Don Cassano, seconded by Ms. Halley and motion was passed unanimously. The meeting was
adjourned at 4:27 p.m.
3

Copies of all written and electronic Stakeholder input
Return to list of attachments
Michelle Mada - AQDX
From: Hether Krause - AQDX
Sent: Monday, June 13, 2016 8:39 AM
To: Johanna Kuspert - AQDX
Subject: FW: Regulatory Outreach
From: Jennifer Pokorski - FCDX
Sent: Monday, June 13, 2016 8:34 AM
To: Hether Krause - AQDX
Cc: Lynne Hilliard - MCDOTX
Subject: FW: Regulatory Outreach
From: Regulatory [mailto:regulations@mail.maricopa.gov]
Sent: Saturday, June 11, 2016 9:47 AM
To: Hether Krause - ENVX; Valerie Beckett - PLANDEVX; Jennifer Pokorski - FCDX
Subject: FW: Regulatory Outreach
-------------------------------------------
From: anne.carlton@aps.com[SMTP:ANNE.CARLTON@APS.COM]
Sent: Saturday, June 11, 2016 9:46:35 AM
To: Regulatory
Subject: Regulatory Outreach
Auto forwarded by a Rule
Citizen Comments
Issue: AQ-2015-004 Rule 324 Stationary Internal Combustion (IC) Engines
Citizen's Name: Anne Carlton
Organization: APS
City: Phoenix
Zip: 85004
Phone Number: 4803229313
Phone Type:
Email: anne.carlton@aps.com
Does citizen want to be contacted: yes
Comment is regarding: other
Comments:
Section 212 of Rule 324 states "Upon approval by the Control Officer..." Does this mean we now have to all nonroad
engines to the CO for approval? APS have dozens, if not hundreds of non-road engines located within Maricopa County.
This includes portable light fixtures, air compressors, non-road engines used throughout the county to provide power at
construction sites, etc. It is unrealistic and unnecessary to have approval on these units since they clearly meet the
definition of non-road.
1

Time of Request: 6/11/2016 9:46:35 AM
2

Michelle Mada - AQDX
From: Hether Krause - AQDX
Sent: Monday, June 13, 2016 3:43 PM
To: Johanna Kuspert - AQDX
Subject: Fwd: EPA Comments on Maricopa 322, 323 & 324
Sent from my iPhone
Begin forwarded message:
From: "Steckel, Andrew" <Steckel.Andrew@epa.gov>
Date: June 13, 2016 at 3:23:25 PM MST
To: "Heather Krause (hkrause@mail.maricopa.gov)" <hkrause@mail.maricopa.gov>, "Marina
Mejia (Mejia.Marina@azdeq.gov)" <Mejia.Marina@azdeq.gov>
Cc: "Gong, Kevin" <Gong.Kevin@epa.gov>, "McKaughan, Colleen"
<McKaughan.Colleen@epa.gov>, "Tong, Stanley" <Tong.Stanley@epa.gov>, "Yannayon,
Laura" <Yannayon.Laura@epa.gov>
Subject: EPA Comments on Maricopa 322, 323 & 324
United States Environmental Protection Agency
Region IX
75 Hawthorne Street
San Francisco, CA 94105-3901
June 13, 2016
Transmittal of EPA Rule Review Comments
To: Hether Krause, Maricopa County Environmental Services Department
hkrause@mail.maricopa.gov
Marina Mejia, Arizona Department Of Environmental Quality
mejia.marina@azdeq.gov
From: Andrew Steckel, Rulemaking Office Chief
steckel.andrew@epa.gov
Re: Maricopa County Air Quality Department, Draft Rule 322 “Power Plant Operations,” Draft
Rule 323 “Fuel Burning Equipment from Industrial/Commercial/Institutional (ICI)
Sources,” and Draft Rule 324 “Stationary Internal Combustion (IC) Engines,” posted for
public comment starting May 13, 2016.
We are providing comments on the draft rules identified above, based on our preliminary review and our
phone discussions with County staff on June 7, 2016. EPA provided comments on earlier drafts of these
rules on March 16, 2016. We appreciate that Maricopa reviewed and addressed some of our concerns,
but some of our comments below reference discussion from this earlier letter. Please direct any
questions about our comments to me at (415) 947-4115 or to Kevin Gong at (415) 972-3073.
1

Rule 322 – Power Plant Operations
Section 102 Applicability
The draft rule language states that subject equipment built or modified after May 10, 1996 must comply
with the limits in this rule, unless the equipment is already subject to more stringent federally enforceable
standards, such as NSPS and NESHAPs standards. This exception conflicts with the Clean Air Act
requirement that ‘major sources’ in ozone nonattainment areas classified at moderate or higher must be
regulated under a SIP-approved RACT rule. If the District determines that different levels of RACT are
appropriate for different types, sizes or ages of equipment, EPA recommends outlining separate emission
limits for these different classes of equipment.
Section 104 Exemptions
104.4 The draft rule language presumes that equipment operating at less than or equal to a 10% annual
capacity factor is exempt from NOx and CO limits, and is exempt from emission control monitoring
system requirements in sections 305, 306 and 307.4. To ensure enforceability, please provide a definition
for the term “annual capacity factor” in Section 200.
104.1.c. This provision provides that gas turbines used at military training facilities and military gas
turbines used anywhere other than a garrison are exempt from the listed sections. Please remove this
exemption or provide definitions for the terms “military training facilities” and “military gas turbines”, and
demonstrate in the rule's staff report why these gas turbines should not be subject to the specified
emission standards.
Section 200 Definitions
Section 237 The second sentence in the definition of Total Dissolved Solids (TDS) appears to describe
the methodology that should be used to determine TDS. This sentence should be removed and the first
sentence modified to read “…glass fiber filter, as determined by Test Method XXX.”
Old Section 301
The current SIP contains language proposed for deletion which regulates particulate matter (PM)
emissions. We note that this section only applies to two units constructed prior to 1996. Please either
retain these limits for those units at a minimum, or provide an adequate CAA 110(l) demonstration which
supports removing these requirements for those units.
New Section 301
The draft rule language appears to state that “good combustion practices” are met for turbines if CEMS
are used (last sentence). It appears the District intends to say that if equipment is utilizing a CEMS, which
already monitors various operating parameters, then the equipment would be exempt from the
requirements of Section 301. Please revise accordingly if this is correct or otherwise clarify the intent of
this last sentence. This provision is also found in Section 501.6.
Section 307
The definition of an “approved combustion control system” is unclear. The District must define the criteria
for approval, and EPA must review and approve of any such alternative control systems if the criteria are
not specific.
The inclusion of “other monitoring system approved by the Control Officer” is an inappropriate allowance
of director’s discretion and should be removed or require EPA approval.
2

EPA recognizes that a Predictive Emissions Monitoring System (PEMS), if certified in accordance with the
applicable provisions of Performance Specification 16, may be appropriate for certain emission units. We
recommend that their usage for compliance purposes be restricted to units with a heat input rate of 250
MMBtu/hr or less, which aligns with other Federal guidance.
The provision that allows the Control Officer to approve any other monitoring system to be equivalent to a
CEMS is too broad. Please strike this language, or also require that EPA must approve of any such
alternative monitoring systems.
Low Mass Emissions (LME) as cited at 219 and 307.4 is not a suitable substitute for Continuous
Emissions Monitoring Systems (CEMS) for the purposes of SIP compliance determination with an
emissions limit.
Section 504
Alternative test methods may not be used upon sole approval by the Control Officer. Please delete this
provision or include language that also requires EPA approval for alternative methods.
Rule 323 – Fuel Burning Equipment from ICI Sources
Section 104
As we have stated in previous comments for this section, please include:
1. appropriate limits on the length of emergency condition and alternative emergency limits for units fired
with emergency fuel that are otherwise normally fired with natural gas and,
2. Clarification on the exceptions for units at military training facilities, as this is not defined.
Section 301.3
As stated in previous comments for this section, please define the frequency of monitoring required to
comply with the provisions for “good combustion practices” for turbines.
Section 306.1
A facility may comply with the emission limits in the rule by installing and operating an emission control
system (ECS). While an ECS may be one possible way to meeting emission limits, it generally cannot
substitute for meeting limits, unless specific control measures or a percent effectiveness are defined as a
part of any required ECS that may be approved by the Control Officer. The definition of an ECS at section
206 also allows discretion to the Control Officer on the types of required control devices, practices, and
monitoring needs for an effective ECS. Please either define a set of specific required control technologies
or practices that must be a part of any effective ECS, or define a required emissions reduction (for
example, 80% reduction of existing NOx emissions).
Section 503.1a
This section allows for various documents to verify compliance with the ultra-low sulfur diesel fuel limit.
Maricopa County should ensure the documents listed give accurate values and use enforceable test
methods. For example, EPA generally has not approved the use of Safety Data Sheets (SDS)/Material
Data Safety Sheets (MSDS) to determine compliance in SIP rules unless the SDS/MSDS specifies that
the compound of interest was determined by an approved EPA method.
Sections 503.2a (Source Test) and 503.3 (CEMS)
These sections state that no compliance determinations will be made during startup and shutdown. This
does not align with EPA’s startup, shutdown, and malfunction (SSM) policy, particularly in the case of
3

CEMS-equipped units (see EPA’s Startup, Shutdown and Malfunction Policy at
https://www3.epa.gov/airquality/urbanair/sipstatus/emissions.html).
Please revise Draft Rule 323 to include alternative numerical limits for operations during these periods,
require best operating practices (see, for example, Yolo-Solano Air Quality Management District Rule
2.34 for Stationary Gas Turbines), or require that units comply with the standard limits during SSM
events.
Section 504
Alternative test methods may not be use upon sole approval by the Control Officer. Please remove this
provision or include language that also requires EPA approval for alternative methods.
Rule 324 – Stationary Reciprocating IC Engines
Sections 103.2b and 212.1d
As stated in previous comments, these sections allows discretion to the Control Officer on the definition of
“nonroad engine” without guidance or restriction on how the Control Officer shall make that determination.
Please remove this discretion.
Section 304.3
Limits for engines subject to NSPS are not automatically considered RACT by EPA for the purposes of
SIP approval. The District must provide analysis that NSPS requirements cited here meet RACT, or
provide the intended numerical limits and operational requirements explicitly within this rule for EPA to
review for SIP approval purposes.
Sections 207, 208 and 306
New language at section 306 treats equivalent and identical replacement engines the same as the
engines they are replacing for the purposes of rule compliance. However, the definition for “Equivalent
Replacement Engine” would allow for an engine that could be up to 20% larger than the original engine,
with the requirement that such larger replacement must also decrease NOx emissions by at least 2%.
While this does not pose an approvability issue for Draft Rule 324, the County should clarify that this
definition only applies in this context, and does not have broader implications.
Section 501.4
This section allows for various documents to verify compliance with the ultra low sulfur diesel fuel limit.
Maricopa County should ensure the documents listed give accurate values and use enforceable test
methods. For example, EPA generally has not approved the use of SDS)/MSDS to determine compliance
in SIP rules unless the SDS/MSDS specifies that the compound of interest was determined by an
approved EPA method.
Section 503
Alternative test methods may not be used upon sole approval by the Control Officer. Please remove this
provision or include language that also requires EPA approval for alternative methods.
4





Return to list of attachments

Return to list of attachments
Executive Summary
of the Report to the Board of Supervisors
Prepared by the Maricopa County Air Quality Department
Board Hearing Date: November 2, 2016
Case #/Title: AQ-2015-005-Rule 336 (Surface Coating Operations)
Agenda Item:
Supervisor Districts: All Districts
The Maricopa County Air Quality Department (department) complied with all statutory and county policies
throughout this rulemaking process. Per the Enhanced Regulatory Outreach Program (EROP) Policy: “In addition
to the required staff report, an executive summary of the report including an overview of stakeholder input and
staff responses will be provided to the Board of Supervisors at least one week prior to any Board of Supervisors’
public hearing.”
Overview Of The Report To The Board Of Supervisors:
The department is requesting the Board of Supervisors to approve amendments to Maricopa County Air Pollution
Control Regulations regarding Rule 336 (Surface Coating Operations) and approve submitting the amended rule
as a revision to the (Arizona) State Implementation Plan (SIP).
The purpose of this rulemaking is to revise the rule to address the requirements of the State Implementation Plan
(SIP) for “moderate” nonattainment for the 2008 eight-hour ozone national ambient air quality standard
(NAAQS). The proposed amendments in Rule 336 include Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT)
for volatile organic compounds (VOCs).
Rule 336 revisions incorporate RACT recommendations from five Control Technique Guidelines (CTGs), update
the transfer efficiency required for spray gun equipment, and clarify work practices.
Overview Of Stakeholder Input And Staff Responses:
Four Stakeholder Workshops were held: June 29, 2015, September 3, 2015, December 17, 2015, and February 18,
2016. Workshop discussions included adding more VOC categories of coatings (but not changing the existing
VOC limits), and clarifying VOC RACT for surface coating operations.
A 30-day comment period was held May-June 2016. During the 30-day comment period, the department received
written comments from the Salt River Project Agricultural Improvement and Power District (SRP) and PING,Inc.
Stakeholders’ concerns were mainly clarifying in nature. Their comments addressed recordkeeping requirements
for aerosol spray cans and labeling requirements for containers containing VOC materials.
The department discussed the comments with Stakeholders and reached an equitable consensus regarding how the
comments should be addressed. The department addressed all of the comments; responses have been incorporated
into the draft rule and are explained in the Preamble of the Draft Notice of Final Rulemaking.

Return to list of attachments
Report to the Board of Supervisors
Prepared by the Maricopa County Air Quality Department
Board of Health Meeting Date: April 25, 2016
Board Hearing Date: November 2, 2016
Case #/Title: AQ-2015-005-Rule 336 (Surface Coating Operations)
Agenda Item:
Supervisor Districts: All Districts
Applicant: Staff
Request: Approve amendments to Maricopa County Air Pollution Control
Regulations regarding Rule 336 (Surface Coating Operations) and
approve submitting the amended rule as a revision to the (Arizona) State
Implementation Plan (SIP).
The purpose of this rulemaking is to revise the rule to address the
requirements of the SIP for “moderate” nonattainment for the 2008 eight-
hour ozone national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS). The
proposed amendments in Rule 336 include Reasonably Available Control
Technology (RACT) for volatile organic compounds (VOCs).
Support/Opposition: During the 30-day comment period, the department received written
comments from the Salt River Project Agricultural Improvement and
Power District (SRP) and PING,Inc.; they stated their opinion as
“support” or “other”. Stakeholders’ concerns were mainly clarifying in
nature. Their comments addressed recordkeeping requirements for
aerosol spray cans and labeling requirements for containers containing
VOC materials.
Staff
Recommendation: Approve
Board of Health
Recommendation: Approve per Staff recommended language
Additional
Comments: This regulatory change is following the Enhanced Regulatory Outreach
Program (EROP) Policy and workflow process. The County Manager
briefed the Board of Supervisors regarding this rulemaking in May 2015.
Stakeholder workshops were held June 2015 through February 2016. On
April 25, 2016, the Board of Health approved this regulatory change for
the Expedited Process.
Presented By: Philip A. McNeely, R.G., Director
Prepared By: Hether Krause

Attachments: Summary of the proposed regulatory change (See Item 6 of the Draft
Notice of Final Rulemaking)
Analysis of input received during the process and how that input was
responded to (See Item 13 of the Draft Notice of Final Rulemaking)
Language of proposed regulatory change or amendment (See Item 17 of
the Draft Notice of Final Rulemaking)
Preamble required by Arizona Revised Statutes (A.R.S.) § 49-471.05
(See Draft Notice of Final Rulemaking)
Minutes from Board of Health meeting
Copies of all written and electronic Stakeholder input
Signed copy of the Maricopa County Resolution “Moratorium on
Increased Regulatory Burdens”

Return to list of attachments
DRAFT NOTICE OF FINAL RULEMAKING
MARICOPA COUNTY AIR POLLUTION CONTROL REGULATIONS
REGULATION III – CONTROL OF AIR CONTAMINANTS
RULE 336: SURFACE COATING OPERATIONS
PREAMBLE
1. Rule affected Rulemaking action
Rule 336: Surface Coating Operations Amend
2. Statutory authority for the rulemaking:
Authorizing statutes: A.R.S. §§ 49-474, 49-479, and 49-480
Implementing statute: A.R.S. § 49-112
3. The effective date of the rule:
Tentative date of adoption: November 2, 2016
4. List of public notices addressing this rulemaking:
Notice of Briefing to Maricopa County Manager: May 2015
Notice of Stakeholder Workshops: June 29, 2015, September 3, 2015, December 17, 2015, and February 18,
2016
Notice of Maricopa County Board of Health Meeting: April 25, 2016
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking: 22 A.A.R. 1159, May 13, 2016
5. The name and address of department personnel with whom persons may communicate regarding the
rulemaking:
Name: Kathleen Sommer or Hether Krause
Address: Planning and Analysis Division
Maricopa County Air Quality Department
1001 N. Central Ave., Suite 595
Phoenix, AZ 85004
Telephone: (602) 506-6010
Fax: (602) 506-6179
Return to list of attachments
E-mail: aqplanning@mail.maricopa.gov
6. An explanation of the rule, including the department’s reasons for initiating the rulemaking:
Summary:
Maricopa County Air Quality Department (department) has proposed an amended Rule 336 (Surface Coating
Operations) that regulates volatile organic compound (VOC) emissions from surface coating facilities that are
not regulated by another source-specific Maricopa County rule. The Clean Air Act (CAA) requires that the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the states control VOC emissions because VOCs react in the
presence of sunlight to form ground-level ozone, a major component of “smog” which is hazardous to human
health and the environment. Ozone is largely created by a photochemical reaction between nitrogen oxides
(NOx) and VOCs in the presence of sunlight. NOx and VOCs called ozone precursors create ground-level
ozone in urban areas because ozone precursors are emitted from vehicle exhausts, fuel combustion, and VOC
coatings used for various surface coating operations such as those regulated in Rule 336. This is the first
revision of Rule 336 since April, 7 1999.
The Phoenix area, determined by violations of the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS), has
been reclassified from “marginal” to “moderate” nonattainment for the 2008 eight-hour ozone NAAQS.
(C.F.R. August 15, 2015) The department is proposing to update Rule 336 to address the CAA requirements of

the State Implementation Plan (SIP) in response to this higher nonattainment classification. The CAA section
172(c)( 1) requires nonattainment areas, such as Phoenix, to use “reasonably available control measures”
(RACM) including “reasonably available control technology” (RACT) to control VOC emissions. Section
182(b)(2)(A) of the Act provides that the EPA define RACT for VOCs in EPA Control Technique Guidelines
(CTGs). The CTGs provide State and local air pollution control authorities information that assists in
determining VOC- RACT for air quality rules. This proposed amendment of Rule 336 updates the rule to these
CTG-RACT requirements. EPA defines RACT as “the lowest emission limitation that a particular source is
capable of meeting by the application of control technology that is reasonably available considering
technological and economic feasibility.”
To attain the required RACT, Maricopa County is proposing to amend Rule 336 and incorporate five (5) CTGs
recommendations for RACT issued by EPA in 2006 through 2008. The CTGs address the following topics:
• Metal Furniture Coatings
• Large Appliance Coatings
• Miscellaneous Metal and Plastic Parts
• Paper, Film, and Foil Coatings
• Industrial Cleaning Solvents
This proposed amendment of Rule 336 incorporates the RACT recommendations from these five CTGs. Rule
336 has been amended to include CTG recommendations for additional types of VOC coating limits, transfer
efficiency for spray equipment to be comparable to the transfer efficiency found in a High Pressure, Low-
Volume (HVLP) spray guns, and additional work practices to reduce VOC emissions.
In addition, the proposed amendments will correct typographical or other clerical errors; make minor
grammatical changes to improve readability or clarity; modify the format, numbering, order, capitalization,
punctuation, or syntax of certain text to increase standardization within and among rules; or make various other
minor changes of a purely editorial nature. As these changes do not alter the sense, meaning, or effect of the
rules, they are not described in detail here, but can be readily discerned in the “underline/ strikeout” version of
the rules contained in Item 17 of this notice.
Background:
The department held four workshops for this rulemaking. Each of the four workshops contributed to this
proposed draft Rule 336; the progression of which is described as follows:
Workshop#1: Monday June 29, 2015
This workshop introduced the proposal to revise Rule 336 and to include sections in the revised rule that
address three additional VOC categories:
Pleasure Craft Manufacturing and Repair
Adhesives and Adhesive Primers
Polyester Resin Operations
These VOC source categories have been controlled to date, with the general terms of Rule 330 (Volatile
Organic Compounds) which has not been updated since 1996. Rule 330 (Volatile Organic compounds) is a
generic VOC Rule which regulates a variety of source-specific facilities in addition to these source categories.
Workshop #2: Thursday September 3, 2015
Stakeholders (surface coating manufacturers and supplier representatives) expressed concern about combining
the variety of VOC regulations into one rule. This workshop focused on whether it was feasible to put all four
of the VOC source categories into one rule. Stakeholders unanimously recommended dividing the VOC
regulated sources into separate rules.
Workshop #3: Thursday December 17, 2015
Three separate rules were proposed at this workshop in response to stakeholder requests:
Rule 336: Miscellaneous Surface Coating Operations (included Pleasure Craft Surface Coating Operations)

New Rule 357: Miscellaneous Industrial Adhesives
New Rule 356: Polyester Resin Operations.
Pleasure Craft Surface Coating Operations were included in the revision of the existing Rule 336; this left the
introduction of two new VOC source specific rules - Rule 356 and Rule 357.
Workshop #4: Thursday February 18, 2016
Revised Rule 336 was presented. Pleasure Craft Manufacturing and Repair coatings were added as a section in
the proposed amended Rule 336 and the two remaining “new” VOC rules were put on-hold. The department
determined that negative declarations will be submitted for the two CTG source categories, adhesives and
adhesive primers and polyester resin operations.
Issues Raised And Discussed During This Rulemaking Process:
Label Containers that Contain VOC: Work Practices, Section 304 requires “Containers in which VOC-
containing materials are stored must have a legible label identifying the container’s contents”. In a previous
posted draft of Rule 336, specific text for labels was required to comply with this section. The Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) requires specific text to comply with labeling for hazardous wastes.
The goal of the Rule 336 labeling requirement is to identify containers that contain VOC. The specific RCRA
labeling text will satisfy this goal, so owners or operators do not have to prepare two different labels for VOC
containing containers.
Quality Class Q Protective Coating: A stakeholder commented that the Quality Class Q protective coating used
on equipment or components within a containment facility of a nuclear power plant was not current. This
requirement referenced in Sections 103.5(d) and defined in Section 200.74 only specifies that this category of
coating is required for this purpose and does not require which method is most current for compliance.
Changes proposed in the surface coating limits for Rule 336: The proposed amendments to Rule 336 increases
the variety of VOC coating categories listed in the rule as was recommended in the CTG for surface coating
operations. The amendments also add the specific definitions for these new coating categories. Even with the
addition of a greater variety of coating categories, the VOC thresholds for the coatings found in Rule 336 have
remained the same and are not lower than those currently found in Rule 336.
Limit Usage of Noncompliant VOC Surface Coatings: Several stakeholders asked to clarify Exemption Section
103.5(b) which addresses use of VOC coatings that exceed the VOC coating thresholds required in the Rule 336
Tables. Clarifying text was added to this exemption that states: “Low usage of VOC coatings which exceed
VOC thresholds for coating categories listed in Tables 336-1 through 336-7 of this rule”. The noncompliant
coatings are permitted for use if the annual aggregate usage does not exceed 55 gallons per year (208 liters/yr.)
at a facility. The operator shall update usage records of these coatings at the end of each month, pursuant to
Section 501.2 of this rule.
Small Surface Coating Source (SSCS) Exemption: Stakeholders requested that the current SSCS exemption be
retained in the proposed rule. The SSCS exemption has been retained in Exemption: Section 103.5(c) and
defined in Definitions: Section 200.77 of this proposed rule. SSCS is proposed to be modified to exclude the
daily limit requirement and will retain the option that a facility that exceeds a 2 ton VOC/year emission limit
for processes regulated by this rule, may retain the exemption, if the owner or operator agrees in writing to
enforceable permit conditions that establishes these or stricter limits.
Clarification of Limits for Touch-Up and Repair Operations: Stakeholders asked for clarification: Touch-up and
Repair coatings are exempt (Section 103.3 of this rule) and Touch-up and Repair coating VOC thresholds are
found in Rule 336: Table-1 and Table -4. These are not conflicting requirements because it depends on the
substrate if touch up or repair coatings are exempt or have VOC threshold limits. “Touch-up and repair
coatings” for Plastic Parts Coatings are exempt from the VOC limits. This exemption is described on page 31
of the CTG (Miscellaneous Metal and Plastic Parts Coatings: September 2008). The “Touch-up and Repair”
coating thresholds listed in Table 336-1 are coating limits for Metal Parts and Product Coatings and are partially
exempt. “Metal part touch-up and repair coatings” are only exempt from the application methods (Rule 336:
Section 302) but are subject to the remaining provisions of this rule. The “Touch-up and Repair” coating
thresholds listed in Table 336-4 are coating limits for Business Machine Coatings and are not exempt.
Demonstration of an HVLP Spray Gun Equivalent or Alternative Application Methods: In workshop
discussions stakeholders asked to clarify compliance determination for the “alternative application method”

spray guns. This provision saves stakeholder time because it eliminates the requirements of getting approvals
from the control officer for use of new spray-gun technologies. Section 302.1(e) is proposed to state that an
EPA recommendation is sufficient for the approval process of the proposed application method. This section is
proposed to state:
Section 302.1(e): An Alternative Application Method: Any method approved by the Administrator of the
Federal EPA as HVLP-equivalent.
This requirement has changed since the last posting of the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking for Rule 336 on May
13, 2016
Three Pleasure Craft Surface Coating Limits: Stakeholders commented that three pleasure craft VOC surface
coating limits: Extreme High Gloss Coatings; Finish Primer/Surfacer; and Other Substrate Anti-foulant Coating
should be higher than the limits proposed in the CTG (Miscellaneous Metal and Plastic Parts Coatings,
September, 2008). Stakeholders have challenged these CTG recommended limits to EPA in 2010. EPA
responded in a June 1, 2010 decision that clarified these suggested pleasure craft VOC surface coating
thresholds were RACT recommendations provided in the CTG and should be “used by the states to determine
what constitutes RACT for VOC operations in their particular ozone nonattainment areas.” The department
reviewed both the stakeholder recommendation and EPA’s decision and proposes in Rule 336, Table 336-7,
that the VOC limits should be as follows:
Extreme High Gloss Topcoat 600 g VOC/l;
Finish Primer Surfacer; 600 g VOC/l;
Other Substrate Anti-Foulant Coating 400 g VOC/l.
The department reviewed stakeholder recommendations and determined these limits constitute RACT for VOC
operations in the Phoenix ozone nonattainment area.
Industrial Cleaning Solvent CTG –VOC Limit for Solvent Cleaners is 0.21 lbs. per gallon: Stakeholders
requested clarification of why solvent cleaner VOC limits are not listed in Section 303.2 (c) where VOC solvent
cleaners are referenced in proposed Rule 336. The VOC threshold limit for solvent cleaners was deleted in this
proposed Rule 336 and replaced with the existing requirement in Rule 336 (Section 305.6): “VOC Solvents can
be used for cleaning coating application equipment only if spray devices are not used and the same principal
solvent is used for cleaning as is used in the coating”.
Rule 336 does not provide a VOC solvent cleaning limit because surface coating cleaners have their own
properties with traditionally low VOCs. The cleaning chemicals used in surface coating cleaning operations
contain little VOC and therefore generate negligible emissions, as described on page 8 of the CTG for
Miscellaneous Metal and Plastic Parts Coatings (September 2008).
Recordkeeping requirements for an aerosol spray can exemption: Stakeholder requested to add Section 501.2(e)
to clarify record keeping requirements for aerosol spray cans coatings. These requirements include: Maintain
purchase records for aerosol spray-cans, including VOC content of can contents.
The exempt use of aerosol spray can coating application and total facility VOC threshold limits: Stakeholders
asked for clarification of how the exempt use of the aerosol spray can applications of VOC materials contribute
to the overall facility VOC usage. Section 103.5(a): Aerosol Spray Can Coating Exemption applies to any use
of non-refillable containers that are less than 22 fluid ounces (0.66 liter) capacity and the VOC usage of this
exemption contributes to the 2 tons/yr facility threshold of this rule as these aerosol spray can applications are
insignificant activities. Rule 200 (of these rules) states: Emissions at or below 2 tons/yr qualifies as an
insignificant activity (Rule 200, Section 200.63). Aerosol spray cans do not qualify as a “trivial activity” as
Aerosol Spray Can Coating is “conducted as part of a source’s primary business activity” qualifying it as an
insignificant activity. (Rule 200, Section 200.127) Permits will address multiple insignificant activities and
their cumulated contribution to a facility’s overall coating limits.
VOC Coating Category: “Other Metal Parts and Products”: Stakeholders expressed concern about two VOC
coating thresholds recommended in the CTG for Miscellaneous Metal and Plastic Parts Coatings; “One-
Component” and “Multi-component” coatings. These two VOC coatings were listed in three of the Tables in
Rule 336: Table 336-1(Metal Part and Products); Table 336-3 (Plastic Parts and Products) : Table 336-4 (Metal
Furniture and Large appliance Coatings). Stakeholders describe the “One-Component” and “Multi-component”
coatings are general use coatings that are currently regulated in the “Other Metal Parts and Products Coating”

category. During workshop discussions, stakeholder s recommended retaining this general coating category
rather than replacing it with two new coating categories. Stakeholders recommended keeping the current
general coating: “Other Metal Parts and Products Coating”. This existing coating category is a VOC coating
category for miscellaneous non-source specific surface coatings that is used in as much as 40% of the coatings
at stakeholder operations as well as includes these two “new” recommended coatings.
Based on this information the department has omitted the “One-Component” and “Multi-component” coating”
category in two of the three Rule 336 tables. The two CTG proposed coatings are redundant with “Other Metal
Parts and Products Coating” and will be regulated within this existing coating category. “Other Metal Parts and
Products Coatings” represent miscellaneous coatings that do not belong to a source specific coating category.
The “Other Metal Parts and Products Coating” category has been retained in Tables 336 -1 and 336-3 and the
CTG suggested coating categories removed. These two CTG suggested coating categories were retained and
still apply in Rule 336; Table 336-4 (Metal Furniture and Large appliance Coatings). The definitions of the two
CTG suggested coating categories are;
“One-Component” is ready to apply straight from the container; and
“Multi-component” is a coating that needs a catalyst or hardener.
O & M plan and the spray-gun cleaning machine: Stakeholders asked if an O&M plan is required for a spray-
gun cleaning machine. It is not required and this requirement has been deleted from an earlier version of the
proposed rule (previously Section 303.1(g))
Allow Use of Usage Records for Compliant Recordkeeping: Stakeholders requested that usage records of VOC
materials be a compliant source for record keeping requirements. Rule 336, Recordkeeping Section 501.1(b)
(current Rule 336) is changed to Section 501.1(c) in the proposed Rule 336 and allows either usage records or
the traditional purchase records. This proposed change in recordkeeping requirments provides less stringent
recordkeeping by omitting the requirement for daily record keeping for all owners or operators who use VOC
coatings and VOC solvent cleaners, not just for “consistently low users” and allows for usage records to
comprise compliant recordkeeping in addition to purchase records .
Increase overall Emission Control System (ECS) efficiency from 85% to 90%: The CTG Miscellaneous Metal
and Plastic Parts Coatings (September 2008), recommends to increase the overall ECS control efficiency to
capture at least 90% from the current 85%. (Rule 336 Section 305.1(a) of this rule)
Deletion of the military exemption: Existing Rule 336 contains a military exemption in Section 305.4(f) ; this
exemption was placed in the rule for one particular source when the current rule was drafted in 1999. The CTGs
do not recommend a military exemption. If the military exemption is allowed to remain in the amended Rule
336, EPA will see this as a relaxation of the CTG. The department researched these types of coatings and found
that since 1999 there are new, compliant, low VOC coatings that may function well as a substitute coating. If a
source still desires to use a non-compliant coating, the burden of proof is on the source to demonstrate that there
are no other compliant coatings that can be used to achieve the desirable effect of the non-compliant coating.
Description Of Proposed Amendments:
The amendments being proposed in Rule 336 can be categorized as follows:
Deleted definitions that are already defined in Rule 100
Deleted definitions that are not found in the text of the rule
Added definitions of different types of coatings listed in the CTGs and terms listed in the Rule
Moved the exemptions from Section 300 and relocate them in Section 100
Incorporated the overall ECS control efficiency recommended in the CTG of 90%
Defined Compliance for Alternative Application Methods
Deleted the vapor pressure requirement for VOC-containing cleaning materials
Added new work practices that are listed in the CTG
Clarified existing work practices in Section 300, such as labeling and transferring in and out of containers
Updated the Operations & Maintenance (O and M) language in Section 305

Updated the compliance schedule in Section 400
Streamlined the recordkeeping provisions in Section 500
Updated the test methods listed in Section 500
Corrected typographical or other clerical errors.
Deleted definitions that are already defined in Rule 100:
Several definitions are deleted in the proposed Rule 336, because they are contained in Rule 100; these include
definitions for organic compounds (Section 229), VOC- borne coatings (Section 252), and VOC borne
diluents Deleted definitions that are not found in the text of the rule:
Definition for Heat Sensitive Material (Section 220); Polyester and Polyester Resin (Section 234) and Polyester
Composite (Section 235) are also deleted, because they no longer appear in proposed Rule 336.
Added definitions of different types of coatings listed in the CTGs and terms used in the rule:
There are a total of 54 new definitions that are proposed in draft Rule 336: Section 200. Most of these
definitions reflect the addition of new specialty coating limits in the four CTGs such as: Adhesion Primer
(Section 200.2); Antifoulant Coating (Section 200.6); Business Machine (Section 200.8) Camouflage Coating
(Section 200.9); Can Coating (Section 200.10) Etching filler (Section 200.24); Extreme High-Gloss Coating
(Section 200.27); Finish Primer/Surfacer (Section 200.33); Heat Resistant Coating (Section 200.39); High
Performance Architectural Coating (Section 200.40); High Build Primer/Surfacer (Section 200.41); High gloss
Coating (Section 200.42); High Temperature Coating (Section 200.43); Mold -Seal Coating (Section 200.56);
Multi-colored Coating (Section 200.57); Multi-component Coating (Section 200.58); Non-Precursor Organic
Compounds (Section 200.59); One-component Coating (Section 200.60); Optical Coating (Section 200.61); Pan
Backing Coating (Section 200.64); Pleasure Craft Coating (Section 200.68); Prefabricated Architectural
Component Coating (Section 200.69); Pretreatment Coating (Section 200.71); Pretreatment Wash Primer
(Section 200.72); Shock-Free Coating (Section 200.77); Solar-Absorbent Coating (Section 200.80); Stencil
Coating (Section 200.81); Texture Coating (Section 200.82); Vacuum-Metalizing Coating (Section 200.90).
Other new definitions found in the rule include: Aerosol Can Spray Coating (Section 200.3); Alternative
Application Methods (Section 200.5); Coating Application Equipment (Section 200.13); Dip Coating (Section
200.16); Drum coating (Section 200.17): Electric Dissipating coating (Section 200.18); Electric Insulating
Varnish (Section 200.19) Electromagnetic Interference (EMI)/Radio Frequency Interference (RFI) Shielding
(Section 200.20); Exempt Organic compounds (Section 200.25); Filler (Section 200.31); Flow Coat (Section
200.35); Fog Coat (Section 200.36); Gloss Reducer Section 200.37); Hand application Methods (Section
200.38); High-Volume, Low Pressure (HVLP) Spray-Gun (Section 200.44): In-Use or Handled (Section
200.48); Large Appliance (Section 200.49); Marine Vessel (Section 200.51); Military Specification Coating
(Section 200.54); Non-Precursor Organic Compounds(Section 200.58); Pleasure Craft (Section 200.65);
Pressure Sensitive Tape or Label(Section 200.68); Transfer Efficiency (section 200.86); VOC Regulatory
(Section 200.91)
The new definitions are underlined in Section 200 of the proposed Rule 336. Proposed Rule 336 is found in
Item 17 of this document.
Moved the exemptions from Section 300 to Section 100:
The exemptions in existing Rule 336: Section 300 are being moved to Section 100: General. Other proposed
amendments moved to Section 100: (Section 103.3(b)(j) and 103.5) are the inclusion of a partial exemptions
for stencil coatings. The stencil coating operations meet the definition of a surface coating operation and are not
considered a graphic arts operation. Lastly, North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) instead of
Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) will be proposed for Section 103.2(b).
Amended the VOC emission limitations to be consistent with the CTGs:
Proposed amendments delete Table 1 and replace it with Tables 336-1 through 336-7.
Incorporated the overall ECS control efficiency recommended in the CTG of 90%:
New text was added in Section 302.5 requiring an ECS, if an owner or operator is using non-compliant
coatings. Text in Section 305.1(b) will be amended to change the control efficiency from 85% to 90%.

Clarified Alternative Application Method Compliance: Any method approved by the Administrator as HVLP-
equivalent is compliant as an application method.
Deleted the VOC Vapor pressure requirement for VOC-solvent cleaners: Current Rule 336 permitted use of
VOC-solvent cleaners with less than 35 mm Hg vapor pressure. A South Coast Air Quality Management
District Study (April 10, 2002) confirms that vapor pressure does not influence VOC mass emissions and does
not result in further reduction of VOC emissions. This is an obsolete requirement and was deleted as it falsely
misleads that low vapor pressure solvents are a form of emissions control. (Current Rule 336 Section 305.6 and
Recordkeeping Section 504)
Added new work practices that are listed in the CTGs:
Section 304 is amended to add new text on cleaning up spills; adding new text on conveyance of VOC-
containing material; and adding new text requiring labeling VOC-containing containers. Sections 304.2 and
Section 304.3 have added text for clarification. Section 304.5 is amended to clarify text describing the labeling
of containers.
Updated the O & M Plan language in Section 305:
Section 305.2 is amended to add new text on O & M Plans.
Updated the compliance schedule in Section 400:
●Sections 401, and 401.2 is amended to delete outdated compliance dates.
●Sections 401.1 and 401.2 is amended to add text that requires the use of the new VOC emission limits for
coatings six months after the date of adoption of the rule and added text that requires the use of the new type
of spray gun for coating no later than six months after the date of adoption of the rule.
●Section 402.1 is amended to add text that requires dates for compliance with the installation of the ECS and
with the O & M Plan requirements no later than 3 months after the rule is adopted.
Streamlined the recordkeeping provisions in Section 500:
●Section 501 is amended to add text to expand the type of documents that will comply with record keeping
requirements and allow submittal of records in electronic or paper format.
●Sections 501 is amended to require less stringent recoding keeping requirements for all users, not just low
VOC coatings users. The requirement for daily records is eliminated for all users.
●Sections 501is amended for clarification purposes.
Updated the test methods listed in Section 500:
●Sections 503 is amended to update the dates and sections of the California rules herein listed.
7. Demonstration of compliance with A.R.S. § 49-112:
Under A.R.S. § 49-479(C), a county may not adopt a rule or ordinance that is more stringent than the rules
adopted by the Director of the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ) for similar sources
unless it demonstrates compliance with the applicable requirements of A.R.S. §49-112.
§ 49-112 County regulation; standards
§ 49-112(A)
When authorized by law, a county may adopt a rule, ordinance or other regulation that is more stringent than or
in addition to a provision of this title or rule adopted by the director or any board or commission authorized to
adopt rules pursuant to this title if all of the following conditions are met:
1. The rule, ordinance or other regulation is necessary to address a peculiar local condition.
2. There is credible evidence that the rule, ordinance or other regulation is either;
(a) Necessary to prevent a significant threat to public health or the environment that results from a peculiar
local condition and is technically and economically feasible.

(b) Required under a federal statute or regulation, or authorized pursuant to an intergovernmental
agreement with the federal government to enforce federal statutes or regulations if the county rule,
ordinance or other regulation is equivalent to federal statutes or regulation.
3. Any fee or tax adopted under the rule, ordinance or other regulation will not exceed the reasonable costs of
the county to issue and administer that permit or plan approval program.
§ 49-112(B)
When authorized by law, a county may adopt rules, ordinances or other regulations in lieu of a state program
that are as stringent as a provision of this title or rule adopted by the director or any board or commission
authorized to adopt rules pursuant to this title if the county demonstrates that the cost of obtaining permits or
other approvals from the county will approximately equal or be less than the fee or cost of obtaining similar
permits or approvals under this title or any rule adopted pursuant to this title. If the state has not adopted a fee or
tax for similar permits or approvals, the county may adopt a fee when authorized by law in the rule, ordinance
or other regulation that does not exceed the reasonable costs of the county to issue and administer that permit or
plan approval program.
Revisions to Maricopa County Air Pollution Control Regulation III, Rule 336: (Surface Coating Operations),
are necessary to address the EPA designated (69 FR 23858, April 30, 2004) 8-hour ozone non-attainment area
within Maricopa County. On June 14, 2005, EPA [70 FR 34362] redesignated the Phoenix metropolitan area to
attainment of the 1-hour ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) and approved the attainment
demonstration and maintenance plan showing maintenance of the 1-hour ozone NAAQS through 2015. The 1-
hour ozone NAAQS was revoked by EPA effective June 15, 2005, under the anti-backsliding provisions of the
Clean Air Act, Sections 110(1) and 193. Certain control measures developed and implemented for the 1-hour
NAAQS were required to remain in place to ensure continued progress toward attainment of the 8-hour
NAAQS. In addition, EPA strengthened the air quality standards for ground-level ozone by reducing the ozone
level from 0.84 ppm to 0.075 ppm to improve public health protection (73 FR 16436, March 27, 2008). Rule
336 meets A.R.S. § 49-112(A)(1), demonstrating the rule is necessary to address a peculiar local condition, in
that Maricopa County fails to meet the 8-hour NAAQS for ozone.
Section 182(b)(2)(A) of the Clean Air Act provides that for certain nonattainment areas. States revise their State
Implementation Plans (SIP) to include RACT for each category of volatile organic compound (VOC) sources
covered by a Control Techniques Guidelines (CTG) document issued between November 15, 1990 and the date
of attainment. EPA issued five revised CTGs that relate to Surface Coating:
• Control Techniques Guidelines for Paper, Film and Foil Coatings (EPA 453/R-07-003, September 2007);
• Control Techniques Guidelines for Metal Furniture Coatings (EPA 453/R-07-005, September, 2007),
• Control Techniques Guidelines for Miscellaneous Metal Parts and Plastic Parts Coatings ( EPA-453/R-008-
003, September 2008),
• Control Techniques Guidelines for Large Appliance Coatings (EPA 453/R-07-004, September 2007), and
• Control Techniques Guidelines for: Industrial Cleaning Solvents (EPA 453/R-06-001, September 2006).
Rule 336 meets the requirements of A.R.S,§ 49-112(A)(2)(b), in that Maricopa County is required by federal
law to revise existing rules to address RACT for the Surface Coating industry. The department affirms that Rule
336 (Surface Coating Operations) meets the requirements of A.R.S. § 49-112 (A)(1) and A.R.S § 49-112 (A)(2).
8. Documents or studies referenced and/or reviewed for this rulemaking:
South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) -Technology Assessment to Determine the
Relationship of Solvent Vapor Pressure and VOC Mass Emissions: Philip O’Bell, Chung Liu, Henry Hogo;
April 10, 2002
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, “Control Techniques Guidelines for Large Appliance Coatings,”
September, 2007, www.epa.gov/ttn/oarpg/t1/ctg/20070928_large_app_ctg.pdf.
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, “Control Techniques Guidelines for Metal Furniture Coating,” July,
2007, www.epa.gov/ttn/oarpg/t1/ctg/ctg_furniture_ctg062807.pdf.
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, “Control Techniques Guidelines for Miscellaneous Metal and Plastic
Parts Coatings,” September,2008, www.epa.gov/ttn/oarpg/t1/ctg/miscmetal_ctg093008.pdf.

U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, “Control Techniques Guidelines for Industrial Cleaning Solvents,”
September, 2006, www.epa.gov/ttn/oarpg/t1/ctg/indus_clean_solv_09_29_06.pdf.
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, “Control Techniques Guidelines for Paper, Film and Foil Coatings,”
September ,2006, www.epa.gov/ttn/oarpg/t1/ctg/20070928_paper_film_ctg.pdf.
Notice of Final Rulemaking, Title 18, Chapter 2. Arizona Administrative Register, Volume 14, Issue 9, July 18,
2008 PP. 2834-2842.
US EPA Internal letter, June 1, 2010: To: Chief, Air Branch Regions I- X: From: Stephen D. Page, Director
Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards: Control Technique Guidelines for Miscellaneous Metal and
Plastic Part Coatings – Industry Request for Reconsideration
9. A showing of good cause why the rule is necessary to promote a statewide interest if the rule will diminish
a previous grant of authority of a political subdivision:
Not applicable.
10. Summary of the economic, small business, and consumer impact:
The following discussion addresses each of the elements required for an economic, small business and
consumer impact statement under A.R.S. § 41-1055.
A. An identification of the rulemaking.
This rulemaking is proposing to revise Rule 336 (Surface Coating Operations).
B. An identification of the persons who will be directly affected by, bear the costs of or directly benefit
from the rulemaking.
The persons who will be directly affected by and bear the costs of this rulemaking will be facilities in Maricopa
County that use VOC coatings listed in Tables 336-1 through 336-7 of the rule that are not more specifically
regulated by another source-specific rule within Maricopa County Rules 300 to 359 of Regulation III. Partial
exemptions apply to certain coatings, application methods, and for low usage conditions. The department has
issued permits to more than 160 facilities that are subject to Rule 336.
C. Cost benefit analysis:
(i) Costs and benefits to the implementing agency and other agencies directly affected by the
implementation and enforcement of the rulemaking.
Because this rulemaking does not impose any new compliance burdens on permitted regulated entities or
introduce additional regulatory requirements, the department deemed that none of the revisions have
potentially significant economic impacts on permitted sources. It is expected that the department will
benefit from the increased clarity of the rule with decreased time to inspect a facility or prepare a permit. In
addition, the rulemaking will not impose increased monetary or regulatory costs on other state agencies,
political subdivisions of this state, persons, or individuals so regulated.
The benefits of the rule revision are anticipated to be a result of the following changes:
- To update the definitions;
- To amend the VOC emission limits for surface coatings consistent with the CTGs;
- To extend Rule 336 to include the pleasure craft industry;
- To delete an exemption for the military;
- To incorporate the overall Emission Control System (ECS) control efficiency listed in the CTGs of
90%;
- To incorporate the transfer efficiency listed in the CTGs which is the same as the transfer efficiency of
a HVLP spray gun;
- To delete the sprayless equipment exemption for vapor pressure limits;
- To add new work practices that are listed in the CTG and clarify existing work practices;
- To update the Operations & Maintenance (O and M) language;

- To update the compliance schedule;
- To streamline the recordkeeping provisions;
- To update the test methods;
- To correct typographical or other clerical errors.
The sources subject to revised Rule 336 already have permits in which these requirements are addressed.
Therefore, this revised rule does not impose new requirements on the permitted facilities, and no costs
would be incurred for compliance with the rule revisions.
(ii) Costs and benefits to a political subdivision of this state directly affected by the implementation
and enforcement of the rulemaking
The rule revisions will not impose increased monetary or regulatory costs on other state agencies, political
subdivisions of this state, persons, or individuals so regulated.
(iii) Costs and benefits to businesses directly affected by the rulemaking, including any anticipated
effect on the revenues or payroll expenditures of employers who are subject to the rulemaking.
The department anticipates that increased clarity and compliance options provided by the Rule 336
revisions will provide a benefit to the regulated and permitted sources; it will take less time for sources
subject to the rule to understand and comply with the rule, which leads to increased compliance, which
leads to decreased costs of compliance to the regulated community. The department does not anticipate
these rule revisions to have a significant impact on a person's income, revenue, or employment in this state
related to this activity. The rule revision will not impose increased monetary or regulatory costs on
individuals so regulated.
D. A general description of the probable impact on private and public employment in businesses,
agencies and political subdivisions of this state directly affected by the rulemaking.
The rule revisions will not impose increased monetary or regulatory costs on other state agencies, political
subdivisions of this state, persons, or individuals so regulated.
E. A statement of the probable impact of the rulemaking on small businesses.
This rulemaking does not impose any new compliance burdens on regulated entities that are permitted or
introduce additional regulatory requirements and will not impose increased monetary or regulatory costs on
any permitted business, persons, or individuals so regulated. As such, there are no costs to pass through to
consumer, which means there are no impacts on consumers.
An identification of the small businesses subject to the rulemaking.
Small businesses subject to this rulemaking are those facilities in Maricopa County that use VOC coatings
listed in Tables 336-1 through 336-7 of the rule that are not more specifically regulated by another source
specific rule within Maricopa County Rules 300 to 359 of Regulation III. Of the approximately 150
commercial permitted sources covered by the rule, about 90 are small businesses.
The administrative and other costs required for compliance with the rulemaking.
This rulemaking updates and clarifies existing rule provisions and definitions to be consistent with federal
performance standards; and to reduce confusion and improve understanding and readability. The
department considered the implications of the proposed amendments to the regulated entities and the
implementing agency and deemed that none of the rule revisions have potentially significant economic
impacts.
F. A statement of the probable effect on county revenues.
The rule revisions will not impose increased monetary or regulatory costs on other county revenues,
political subdivisions of this state, persons, or individuals so regulated. Without costs to pass through to
customers, there is no projected change in consumer purchase patterns and, thus, no impact on county
revenues from sales taxes.
G. A description of the methods that the agency may use to reduce the impact on small businesses.
(i) Establishing less costly compliance requirements in the rulemaking for small businesses.

By correcting and clarifying existing rule provisions and definitions and streamlining recordkeeping
provisions, this rulemaking lessens or eases the regulatory burden for small businesses.
(ii) Establishing less costly schedules or less stringent deadlines for compliance in the rulemaking.
This rulemaking corrects or clarifies existing rule provisions and definitions to reduce confusion and
improve understanding and readability.
(iii) Exempting small businesses from any or all requirements of the rulemaking.
This rulemaking corrects or clarifies existing rule provisions and definitions to reduce confusion and
improve understanding and readability.
(iv) A description of any less intrusive or less costly alternative methods of achieving the purpose of
the rulemaking.
This rulemaking corrects or clarifies existing rule provisions and definitions to reduce confusion and
improve understanding and readability.
H. A description of any data on which the rule is based:
Not-Applicable
I. If for any reason adequate data are not reasonably available, the agency shall explain the
limitations of the data and the methods that were employed in the attempt to obtain the data and
shall characterize the probable impacts in qualitative terms:
Not-applicable
11. Name and address of department personnel with whom persons may communicate regarding the
accuracy of the economic, small business, and consumer impact statement:
Name: Kathleen Sommer or Hether Krause
Address: Planning and Analysis Division
Maricopa County Air Quality Department
1001 N. Central Ave., Suite 595
Phoenix, AZ 85004
Telephone: (602) 506-6010
Fax: (602) 506-6179
E-mail: aqplanning@mail.maricopa.gov
12. Description of the changes between the proposed rule, including supplemental notices and final rule:
Since the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking was published on May 13, 2016 (22 A.A.R 1159), the department is
proposing the following additional amendments:
• Section 103.6 (Partial Exemptions): This section is proposed to be moved to new Section 302.2 (b)
(Application Methods For Surface Coatings).
• Section 244 (Definition Of “High-Volume, Low Pressure (HVLP) Spray Gun”): This section is proposed for
correction to delete “and at the air horns” to accurately describe the pressure measurement. Additionally
options for compliance determination of an HVLP spray gun are added to the definition.
• Section 275 (Definition Of “Restricted Spray Gun”): This section is proposed to be deleted.
• Section 501.2(b) (Recordkeeping And Reporting-Current Lists): Re-inserted SDS or MSDS and included in
the introductory statement to Section 501.2(b) the sentence “The documentation must provide accurate VOC
content values or be based on enforceable test methods as approved by the Administrator to determine the
VOC content.”
• Section 501.2(c)(2) (Recordkeeping And Reporting-Current Lists): Deleted recordkeeping requirements for
“low VOC coatings” and “low VOC cleaning solvents”.

• Section 501.2(e) (Recordkeeping And Reporting-Current Lists): Added usage records as acceptable
compliance documents for recordkeeping documentation for aerosol spray-can coating.
• Section 503 (Compliance Determination And Test Methods): Included text that allows for the use of
alternative test methods to determine compliance with the rule and that allows test methods as approved by
the Administrator to be used and clarified the provision regarding when more than one test method is
permitted for a compliance determination. Return to list of attachments
13. Summary of the comments made regarding the rule and the department response to them:
Since the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking was published on May 13, 2016 (22 A.A.R. 1159), the department
received comments from the Salt River Project Agricultural Improvement and Power District (SRP) and
PING,Inc. The comments and the department’s responses are provided below.
Comment #1: Section 304.5 (Work Practices-Handling, Disposal And Storage Of VOC-Containing
Material) PING, Inc. commented that in the current draft of Rule 336, Section 304.2 states, in part, “The
containers shall be clearly marked “Disposal of VOC Material” and remain covered with a leak tight cover,
when not in use”. Marking of waste containers is both a best practice as well as a regulatory requirement. From
a regulatory perspective, waste streams are typically regulated under the Resource Conservation and Recovery
Act (RCRA). The workforce is trained to appropriately handle waste materials. Workers would look for the
“Hazardous Waste” label to identify the appropriate container to place VOC-containing wastes. The current
language in the draft rule requires the “containers shall be clearly marked “Disposal of VOC Material”. For
those workplaces that are regulated by RCRA, the marking requirement noted in the rule adds complexity, as
now containers will need to be double-labeled. It would appear that the intent of the marking requirement is to
make sure that the contents of the container are clearly identified. PING, Inc. proposes the language in the rule
be modified to state “The containers shall be clearly marked “Disposal of VOC Material” or as required by
other applicable law and remain covered with a leak tight cover, when not in use”.
Response #1: Section 304.5 (Work Practices-Handling, Disposal And Storage Of VOC-Containing Material)
The language commented on by PING, Inc. was removed from Rule 336 prior to the publication of the Notice
of Proposed Rulemaking. In the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking that was published on May 13, 2016 (22
A.A.R. 1159), the department proposed Section 304.5 to read “Containers in which VOC-containing materials
are stored must have a legible label identifying the container’s contents”. The department proposes to retain this
requirement. The specific RCRA labeling requirement complies with this requirement; double labeling will not
be necessary.
Comment #2: Section 501.2(b) (Recordkeeping And Reporting-Current Lists)
SRP commented that: In the proposed revisions to Rule 336, MCAQD is proposing to remove the use of
manufacturer’s safety data sheets (SDS or MSDS) as a coating’s written record of VOC content. The use of an
SDS or MSDS is the most common source of VOC content information and removal of this source would cause
an undue burden on a facility. SRP believes that MCAQD may have inadvertently partially deleted this section.
SRP suggests that MCAQD retain the ability to use SDS or MSDS as an information source for the VOC
content recordkeeping requirements.
Response #2: Section 501.2(b) (Recordkeeping And Reporting-Current Lists)
In response to SRP’s comment and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA’s) comment, the
department proposes to re-insert Safety Data Sheets (SDS) or Material Safety Data Sheets (MSDS) and
proposes to include in the introductory statement to Section 501.2(b) the sentence “The documentation must
provide accurate VOC content values or be based on enforceable test methods as approved by the Administrator
to determine the VOC content.” The EPA commented in June 2016 on all of the rules that the department is
revising in regards to addressing the requirements of the State Implementation Plan (SIP) for “moderate”
nonattainment for the 2008 eight-hour ozone national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS). In such
comments, the EPA asked the department “to ensure the documents listed (to verify compliance) give accurate
values and use enforceable test methods. For example, EPA generally has not approved the use of SDS/MSDS
to determine compliance in SIP rules unless the SDS/MSDS specifies that the compound of interest was
determined by an approved EPA method.”
Comment #3: Section 501.2(e) (Recordkeeping And Reporting-Current Lists)

SRP commented that: In the proposed revisions to Rule 336, Section 501.2(e), the recordkeeping requirements
for aerosol spray cans are limited to purchase records. SRP suggests that MCAQD provide flexibility in the
recordkeeping requirements and allow either purchase or usage records to be used. This would be consistent
with other surface coating recordkeeping requirements contained in Section 501.2(c).
Response #3: Section 501.2(e) (Recordkeeping And Reporting-Current Lists)
The department proposes to add usage records as acceptable compliance documents for recordkeeping
documentation for aerosol spray can coating.
14. Any other matters prescribed by the statute that are applicable to the specific department or to any
specific rule or class of rules:
Not applicable.
15. Incorporations by reference and their location in the rules:
The department incorporated by reference sections of the Code of Federal Regulations in the following sections
of the rule: Section 503.2 (Compliance Determination And Test Methods-Test Methods Incorporated By
Reference)
16. Was this rule previously an emergency rule?
No
17. The full text of the rule follows: Return to list of attachments
MARICOPA COUNTY
AIR POLLUTION CONTROL REGULATIONS
REGULATION III – CONTROL OF AIR CONTAMINANTS
RULE 336
SURFACE COATING OPERATIONS
INDEX
SECTION 100 – GENERAL
101 PURPOSE
102 APPLICABILITY
103 PARTIAL EXEMPTIONS
104 TOTAL CATEGORICAL EXEMPTIONS
SECTION 200 – DEFINITIONS
201 201 ADHESIVE
202 ADHESION PRIMER
202 AEROSOL CAN
203 AEROSOL CAN SPRAY COATING
203 204 AIR-DRIED COATING
205 ALTERNATIVE APPLICATION METHODS
206 ANTIFOULANT COATING
204 207 BAKED COATING
208 BUSINESS MACHINE,
209 CAMOUFLAGE COATING
205 210 CAN COATING
206 211 CAN PRINTING INK

207 212 CLEAR COAT
213 COATING APPLICATION EQUIPMENT
208 214 COIL COATING
209 215 DAY
216 DIP COATING
217 DRUM COATING
218 ELECTRIC DISSIPATING COATING
219 ELECTRIC INSULATING VARNISH
220 ELECTROMAGNETIC INTERFERENCE (EMI)/RADIO-FREQUENCY INTERFERENCE
(RFI) SHIELDING
210 221 ELECTROSTATIC SPRAY/SYSTEM
211 222 EMISSION CONTROL SYSTEM (ECS)
212 223 END SEALING COMPOUND
224 ETCHING FILLER
213 EXEMPT EVAPORATING COMPONENTS (EXEMPT COMPOUNDS)
225 EXEMPT COMPOUNDS
214 226 EXTERIOR CAN BASECOAT
227 EXTREME HIGH-GLOSS COATING
215 228 EXTREME-PERFORMANCE COATING
216 229 FABRIC
217 230 FABRIC COATING
231 FILLER
218 232 FILM COATING
233 FINISH PRIMER/ SURFACER
219 234 FLEXIBLE PLASTIC PART OR PRODUCT
235 FLOW COAT
236 FOG COAT
237 GLOSS REDUCER
238 HAND APPLICATION METHODS
239 HEAT-RESISTANT COATING
240 HIGH-PERFORMANCE ARCHITECTURAL COATING
241 HIGH BUILD PRIMER/SURFACER
242 HIGH GLOSS COATING
243 HIGH-TEMPERATURE COATING
220 HEAT SENSITIVE MATERIAL
244 HIGH-VOLUME, LOW PRESSURE (HVLP) SPRAY GUN
221 245 HIGHWAY VEHICLE
222 246 INTERIOR BASECOAT

223 247 INTERIOR BODY SPRAY
248 IN USE OR HANDLED
224 249 LARGE APPLIANCE
225 250 LOW PRESSURE SPRAY GUN
251 MARINE VESSEL
226 252 METAL FURNITURE
253 METALLIC COATING
254 MILITARY SPECIFICATION COATING
227 MINUS EXEMPT COMPOUNDS or MINUS EXEMPT EVAPORATING COMPONENTS
228 255 MOBILE EQUIPMENT
256 MOLD-SEAL COATING
257 MULTI-COLORED COATING
258 MULTI-COMPONENT COATING
229 ORGANIC COMPOUND
259 ONE-COMPONENT COATING
260 OPTICAL COATING
230 261 OTHER METAL PARTS AND PRODUCTS
231 262 OVERVARNISH
263 PAN BACKING COATING
232 264 PAPER COATING
233 265 PLASTIC
266 PLEASURE CRAFT
267 PLEASURE CRAFT COATING
234 POLYESTER AND POLYESTER RESIN
235 POLYESTER COMPOSITE
268 PREFABRICATED ARCHITECTURAL COMPONENT COATING
269 PRESSURE SENSITIVE TAPE OR LABEL
270 PRETREATMENT COATING
271 PRETREATMENT WASH PRIMER
236 272 PRIMER
237 273 QUALITY CLASS Q
238 REFINISHING
239 274 REPAIR COATING
240 RESTRICTED SPRAY GUN
275 SHOCK-FREE COATING
241 276 SILICONE RELEASE COATING
242 277 SMALL SURFACE COATING SOURCE (SSCS)
278 SOLAR-ABSORBENT COATING

279 STENCIL COATING
243 STRIPPABLE BOOTH COATING
244 280 SURFACE COATING
245 281 SURFACE COATING OPERATION
282 TEXTURE COATING
246 283 THREE-PIECE CAN SIDE-SEAM COAT COATING
247 284 TOPCOAT
248 TOTAL VOC VAPOR PRESSURE (VOC COMPOSITE PARTIAL PRESSURE)
249 285 TOUCH-UP COATING
286 TRANSFER EFFICIENCY
250 287 TWO-PIECE CAN EXTERIOR END COAT
288 VACUUM-METALIZING COATING
251 VINYL COATING (COATING ON VINYL)
252 VOC-BORNE COATING
253 VOC-BORNE DILUENT
289 VOC ACTUAL
254 290 VOC CONTENT
291 VOC REGULATORY
SECTION 300 – STANDARDS
301 SURFACE COATINGS
302 APPLICATION METHODS FOR SURFACE COATINGS
303 CLEANUP OF APPLICATION EQUIPMENT
304 WORK PRACTICES – HANDLING AND , DISPOSAL AND STORAGE OF VOC
CONTAINING MATERIAL
305 EXEMPTIONS:
306 305 REQUIREMENTS FOR AIR POLLUTION CONTROL EQUIPMENT AND EMISSION
CONTROL SYSTEM (ECS) MONITORING EQUIPMENT REQUIREMENTS
SECTION 400 – ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS
401 COMPLIANCE SCHEDULE VOC LIMITS
402 COMPLIANCE SCHEDULE O&M PLAN
SECTION 500 – MONITORING AND RECORDS
501 RECORDKEEPING AND REPORTING
502 ECS RECORDING REQUIREMENTS
503 COMPLIANCE DETERMINATION AND TEST METHODS
504 FORMULA FOR TOTAL VOC VAPOR PRESSURE
Revised 07/13/88
Revised 09/21/92
Revised 06/19/96
Revised 04/07/99

Revised 09/25/13
Revised 07/13/1988; Revised 09/21/1992; Revised 06/19/1996; Revised 04/07/1999; Revised 09/25/2013; Revised
XX/XX/XXXX
MARICOPA COUNTY
AIR POLLUTION CONTROL REGULATIONS
REGULATION III – CONTROL OF AIR CONTAMINANTS
RULE 336
SURFACE COATING OPERATIONS
SECTION 100 – GENERAL
101 PURPOSE: To limit the emission of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) from surface coating operations.
102 APPLICABILITY: This rule applies to VOC coating operations coatings listed in Tables 336-1 through
336-7 of this rule Table 1 of this rule that are not more specifically regulated by another source specific rule
within Maricopa County Rules 300 to 359 of Regulation III, Examples of coating operations not regulated
by this rule appear subsection 305.1 as listed in Section 104 of this rule. Additionally:
102.1 Surface-coating activities regulated under this rule include, but are not limited to, the application
of coating, coating preparation/mixing at the facility applying the coating, and the cleanup of
coating application equipment.
102.2 Subsections 305.2 Section 103 through 305.7 set sets forth partial or conditional exemptions for
certain materials or uses employed by a surface coating operation subject to this rule.
102.3 This rule is not applicable to coatings having a VOC content, minus exempt compounds, of less
than 0.15 lb VOC/gal (18g/L). nor to solvents having a VOC content of material less than 0.15 lb
VOC/gal.
102.4 NSPS & NESHAP: In addition to this rule, facilities may be subject to New Source Performance
Standards (NSPS) in Rule 360 and/or to National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutants (NESHAP) in Rule 370 of these Rules and Regulations rules.
103 PARTIAL EXEMPTIONS:
103.1 Qualified Materials Exemption:
a. Leak-Preventing Materials: Sealants, caulking, and similar materials used on the following
substrates for the primary purpose of leak prevention are exempt from this rule:
(1) Non-metallic substrates; and
(2) Substrates made post manufacture, such as, but not limited to, old joints and seals on pipe
and valve assemblies.
b. Certain Joint Fillers: Caulking and beaded sealants used to fill gaps or to fill joints between
surfaces are exempt from this rule, except those used in manufacturing other metal parts and
products or in the manufacturing of cans.
103.2 Extreme Performance Coatings Exemption: Extreme performance coatings are exempt from the
VOC limits in Tables 336-1 through 336-7 of this rule but not from any other sections of this rule
when used under the following conditions:
a. On internal combustion engine components that are normally above 250°F (121°C) during use; or
b. At temperatures above 250°F (121°C) on items that are both included under the North
American Industry Classifications System (NAICS) codes 334210, 334220, 334290, 334416,
334417, 334418, 334419, 334310 or 336419 and are electronic products in space vehicles
and/or are communications equipment.
103.3 Plastic Parts Coating Exemption: The following types of plastic parts coatings are exempt from
the VOC limits in Tables 336-1 through 336-7 of this rule but are subject to the remaining
provisions of this rule.

a. Touch-up and repair coatings.
b. Stencil coatings applied on clear or transparent substrates.
c. Clear or translucent coatings.
d. Coatings applied at a paint manufacturing facility while conducting performance
tests on the coatings.
e. If substitute compliant coatings are not available and a facility that uses less than 50 gal/yr. of
an individual coating category and does not exceed 200 gal/yr total usage of all such coatings.
Non-compliant coatings: After a sufficient demonstration by the user that no compliant
substitute coating exists, a facility is permitted to use no more than 50 gal/yr. of an individual
non-compliant coating, not exceeding 200 gal/yr total usage of all such coatings and the
coatings are approved for use in a Maricopa County Air Pollution Permit.
f. Reflective coatings applied to highway cones.
g. Mask coatings that are less than 0.5 millimeter thick (dried) and the area coated is
less than 25 square inches.
h. Electromagnetic Interference (EMI)/ Radio-Frequency Interference (RFI) shielding coatings.
i. Heparin-benzalkonium chloride (HBAC)-containing coatings applied to medical devices,
provided that the total usage of all such coatings does not exceed 100 gal/yr per facility.
j. Business machine plastic part coatings:
(1) Texture coatings.
(2) Vacuum metalizing coatings.
(3) Gloss reducers.
(4) Adhesion primers.
(5) Electrostatic preparation coatings.
(6) Resist coatings.
(7) Stencil coatings.
103.4 Application Methods Exemption: The following coatings are exempt from application methods
in Section 302 of this rule but are subject to the remaining provisions of this rule:
a. Metal part texture coatings.
b. Metal part touch-up and repair coatings.
c. Plastic part coating for airbrush operations using less than 5 gal/yr of coating.
d. Extreme high gloss coatings for pleasure craft surface coating operations.
103.5 Application Methods and VOC-Limit Exemption: The following surface coating operations are
exempt from Sections 301, 302, and 305 of this rule but shall comply with Section 303, 304, and
500 of this rule.
a. Aerosol can spray coating.
b. Low usage of VOC Coatings which exceed VOC Thresholds for coating categories listed in
Tables 336-1 through 336-7 of this Rule: The non-compliant coatings are permitted for use if
the annual aggregate usage does not exceed 55 gallons per year (208 liters/yr.) at a facility.
The operator shall update usage records of these coatings at the end of each month, pursuant
to Section 501.2 of this rule.
c. A Small Surface-Coating Source: A facility that has less than either a 15 lb/day or a 2 ton/year
VOC-emission limit in an Air Pollution Permit for processes regulated by this rule may apply
to permitting an owner or operator may qualify for the an exemption. if that consists of their

agreement s/he agrees in writing to an enforceable permit condition that establishes these or
stricter limits.
d. A Quality Class Q protective coating that is used on equipment, structures, and/or components
within a containment facility of a nuclear power plant.
e. A tactical military-equipment coating that is approved in a Maricopa County Air Pollution
Permit subsequent to a sufficient demonstration by the user that no compliant substitute
exists.
f. Large Appliance Coating:
(1) Stencil coatings.
(2) Safety-indicating coatings.
(3) Solid-film lubricants.
(4) Electric-insulating and thermal-conducting coatings.
(5) Coating application utilizing hand-held aerosol can spray coating.
g. Metal Parts Coating:
(1) Stencil coatings.
(2) Safety-indicating coatings.
(3) Solid-film lubricants.
(4) Electric-insulating and thermal-conducting coatings.
(5) Magnetic data storage disk coatings.
(6) Plastic extruded onto metal parts to form a coating.
104 TOTAL CATEGORICAL EXEMPTIONS: This rule does not apply to the following operations:
104.1 Aerospace coating operations (Rule 348).
104.2 Architectural coatings including buildings and erected structures (Rule 335).
104.3 Solvent cleaning or stripping a surface for coating or other purpose (Rule 331).
104.4 Marine vessel exterior refinishing (EPA 453/B-97-001).
104.5 Printing and graphic arts coating (Rule 337).
104.6 Semiconductor manufacturing (Rule 338).
104.7 Coating or refinishing a highway vehicle or mobile equipment (Rule 345).
104.8 Coating wood furniture and fixtures (Rule 342).
104.9 Coating wood millwork (Rule 346).
SECTION 200 – DEFINITIONS: For the purpose of this rule, the following definitions shall apply, in addition to
those definitions found in Rule 100 (General Provisions and Definitions) of these rules. In the event of any
inconsistency between any of the Maricopa County air pollution control rules, the definitions in this rule take
precedence.
201 201 ADHESIVE: A material used for the primary purpose of bonding two or more surfaces together.
202 ADHESION PRIMER: A coating that is applied to a plastic polymer part to promote the adhesion of a
subsequent coating.
202 AEROSOL CAN: A non-refillable hand-held container from which a product is dispensed by means of
pressurized propellant packaged within the container.
203 AEROSOL CAN SPRAY COATING: A coating sold in a hand-held, pressurized, non-refillable
container, of less than 22 fluid ounces (0.66 liter) capacity, and that is expelled from the container in a
finely divided form when a valve on the container is depressed.

203 204 AIR-DRIED COATING: A coating which is dried by the use of air or forced warm air at temperatures up to
and including 200°F (93.3°C).
205 ALTERNATIVE APPLICATION METHODS: Any method approved by the Administrator as HVLP-
equivalent.
206 ANTIFOULANT COATING: A coating applied to the underwater portion of a pleasure craft to prevent
or reduce the attachment of biological organisms, and registered with the United States Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) as a pesticide under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (7
United States Code Section 136).
204 207 BAKED COATING: A coating that is dried or cured in an oven in which the oven temperature exceeds 200°F
(93.3°C).
208 BUSINESS MACHINE: A device that uses electronic or mechanical methods to process information,
perform calculations, print or copy information, or convert sound into electrical impulses for transmission,
such as:
208.1 Products classified as typewriters under SIC Code 3572;
208.2 Products classified as electronic computing devices under SIC Code 3573;
208.3 Products classified as calculating and accounting machines under SIC Code 3574;
208.4 Products classified as telephone and telegraph equipment under SIC Code 3661;
208.5 Products classified as office machines, not elsewhere classified, under SIC Code 3579; and (6)
photocopy machines, a subcategory of products classified as photographic equipment under SIC
Code 3861.
209 CAMOUFLAGE COATING: A coating used, principally by the military, to conceal equipment from
detection.
205 210 CAN COATING: Any A coating either used in the production of metal cans applied to the surface(s) of
formed cans or applied at a can making facility to the surface(s) of flat metal sheets or strips that are formed
there into cans.
206 211 CAN PRINTING INK: A fluid or viscous formulation used in can printing that imparts design, pattern, and/or
alphanumeric symbols to a can.
207 212 CLEAR COAT: Any A coating which that lacks color or opacity or is transparent.
213 COATING APPLICATION EQUIPMENT: Any equipment including but not limited to spray guns, wands,
rollers, brushes or any other means used to apply or cover a surface with a coating for either aesthetic,
protection or other purpose.
208 214 COIL COATING: Any A coating applied to the surface(s) of flat metal sheets or strips that are is formed into
rolls or coils not used to make cans.
209 215 DAY: A period of 24 consecutive hours beginning at midnight.
216 DIP COATING: A method of applying a coating to a substrate by submersion into and removal from a
coating bath.
217 DRUM COATING: Coating of a cylindrical metal shipping container larger than 12 gallons capacity but no
larger than 110 gallons capacity.
218 ELECTRIC DISSIPATING COATING: A coating that rapidly dissipates a high-voltage electric charge.
219 ELECTRIC INSULATING VARNISH: A non-convertible-type coating applied to electric motors,
components of electric motors, or power transformers, to provide electrical, mechanical, and environmental
protection or resistance.
220 ELECTROMAGNETIC INTERFERENCE (EMI)/ RADIO-FREQUENCY INTERFERENCE
(RFI) SHIELDING: A coating used on electrical or electronic equipment to provide shielding against
electromagnetic interference, radio frequency interference, or static discharge.

210 221 ELECTROSTATIC SPRAY/SYSTEM: A method of applying atomized paint by electrically charging the
coating and the object being coated with opposing charges. A higher proportion of the coating reaches and
coats the object than would occur in the absence of a charge.
211 222 EMISSION CONTROL SYSTEM (ECS): A system, approved in writing by the Control Officer, to reduce
emissions of volatile organic compounds. Such a system consists of an emissions collection system and an
emissions processing subsystem. designed and operated in accordance with good engineering practice to
reduce emissions of volatile organic compounds.
212 223 END SEALING COMPOUND: A compound which is coated onto can ends and functions as a gasket when
the end is attached to the can.
224 ETCHING FILLER: A coating that contains less than 23 percent solids by weight and at least ½ percent acid
by weight, and is used instead of applying a pretreatment coating followed by a primer.
213 EXEMPT EVAPORATING COMPONENTS (EXEMPT COMPOUNDS): The non-VOC, evaporating
portion of a coating formulation; this necessarily includes all non-precursor organic compounds, as well as
water and other inorganic liquids and gases.
225 EXEMPT COMPOUNDS: The federally listed non-precursor organic compounds,which have been
determined to have negligible photochemical reactivity as listed in 40 CFR 51.100(s)(1) and in Appendix G
of these rules.
214 226 EXTERIOR CAN BASECOAT: Any A coating applied to the exterior of a can to provide protection for the
metal or to provide background for any lithographic or printing operation.
227 EXTREME HIGH-GLOSS COATING: A coating when tested by the ASTDM D-523 adopted in 1980
shows reflectance of 75 or more on a 60° meter.
215 228 EXTREME-PERFORMANCE COATING: A coating used on a surface where the coated surface in its
intended use is at temperatures consistently in excess of 250°F (121°C). Extreme-performance coatings include
but are not limited to, coatings applied to locomotives, railroads cars, farm machinery, plastic, rubber, leather,
or glass.
216 229 FABRIC: A textile material. Non-manufactured items from nature are not fabric except for natural threads,
fibers, filaments, and similar that have been manufactured into textile fabric.
217 230 FABRIC COATING: Any A decorative or protective coating or reinforcing material applied either onto or
impregnated into textile fabric.
231 FILLER: A relatively non-adhesive substance added to an adhesive to improve its working properties,
permanence, strength, or other qualities.
218 232 FILM COATING: Any A coating applied in a web coating process on film substrate other than paper or
fabric, including, but not limited to, typewriter ribbons, photographic film, magnetic tape, and metal foil gift
wrap.
233 FINISH PRIMER/SURFACER: A coating applied with a wet film thickness of less than 10 mils prior to the
application of a topcoat for purposes of providing corrosion resistance, adhesion of subsequent coatings, a
moisture barrier, or promotion of a uniform surface necessary for filling in surface imperfections. A finish
primer/surfacer shall have a wet film thickness of less than 10 mils as determined by ASTM Method D
1212-85. A one-component finish primer is any finish primer where the coating resin cures without the
need for an added catalyst or converter. A two-component finish primer is any finish primer where the
coating resin cures only when a catalyst or converter is added.
219 234 FLEXIBLE PLASTIC PART OR PRODUCT: A plastic part or product designed to withstand significant
deformation without damaging it for its intended use. Not included are flexible plastic parts that are found on a
can, coil, metal furniture, or large appliance, or that are already a part of an aerospace component, highway
vehicle, mobile equipment, architectural building or structure, or a previously coated marine-vessel .
235 FLOW COAT: A non-atomized technique of applying coatings to a substrate with a fluid nozzle in a fan
pattern with no air supplied to the nozzle.
236 FOG COAT: A coating that is applied to a plastic part for the purpose of color matching without masking
a molded-in texture. A fog coat shall not be applied at a thickness of more than 0.5 mils of coating solids.

237 GLOSS REDUCER: A coating that is applied to a plastic part solely to reduce the shine of the part and is
applied at a thickness of less than or equal to 0.5 mils of coating solids.
238 HAND APPLICATION METHODS: Application of coatings by non-mechanical, hand-held equipment
including but not limited to paint brushes, hand rollers, caulking guns, trowels, spatulas, syringe daubers,
rags, and sponges.
239 HEAT-RESISTANT COATING: A coating that must withstand a temperature of at least 400°F (204°C)
during normal use.
240 HIGH PERFORMANCE ARCHITECTURAL COATING: A coating used to protect architectural
subsections and that meets the requirements of the Architectural Aluminum Manufacturer Association's
publication number AAMA 2604-05 (Voluntary Specification, Performance Requirements and Test
Procedures for High Performance Organic Coatings on Aluminum Extrusions and Panels) or 2605-05
(Voluntary Specification, Performance Requirements and Test Procedures for Superior Performing Organic
Coatings on Aluminum Extrusions and Panels).
241 HIGH BUILD PRIMER/SURFACER: A coating applied with a wet film thickness of 10 mils or more
prior to the application of a topcoat for purposes of providing corrosion resistance, adhesion of subsequent
coatings, or a moisture barrier, or promoting a uniform surface necessary for filling in surface
imperfections. A high-build primer/surfacer shall have a wet-film thickness of 10 mils or more as
determined by ASTM Method D1212-85.
242 HIGH GLOSS COATING: A coating that achieves at least 85 percent reflectance on a 60° meter when
tested by ASTM D 523-89.
243 HIGH TEMPERATURE COATING: A coating that is certified to withstand a temperature of 1000°F
(537°C) for 24 hours.
220 HEAT SENSITIVE MATERIAL: Materials which cannot consistently be exposed to temperatures greater than
203°F (95°C) without materially affecting desired function, performance, or other characteristics
244 HIGH-VOLUME, LOW PRESSURE (HVLP) SPRAY GUN: Spray equipment that is used to apply
coating by means of a spray gun that operates at 10 psig of atomizing air pressure or less at the center of the
air cap. A permanently affixed manufacturer’s gun identification or manufacturer’s gun literature shall
identify and be proof of an HVLP gun.
221 245 HIGHWAY VEHICLE: Any A vehicle that is physically capable of being driven upon a highway
including, but not limited to, cars, pickups, vans, trucks, truck-tractors, motor-homes, motorcycles, and
utility vehicles.
222 246 INTERIOR BASECOAT: Any A coating applied to the interior of a can to provide a protective lining
between the intended contents and the metal shell of the can.
223 247 INTERIOR BODY SPRAY: Any A coating sprayed onto the interior of a can to provide a protective film
between the intended contents and the metal shell of the can.
248 IN USE OR HANDLED: Actively engaging the materials with activities such as mixing, depositing,
brushing, rolling, padding, wiping or removing or transferring material into or out of the container.
224 249 LARGE APPLIANCE: A door, case, lid, panel, or interior support part of residential and commercial
washers, dryers, ranges, refrigerators, freezers, water heaters, dishwashers, trash compactors, air conditioners,
evaporative coolers, and other similar products.
225 250 LOW PRESSURE SPRAY GUN: An air-atomized spray gun, that which by design, functions best at tip air
cap pressures below 10 psig (516 mm Hg) (0.7 bar), measured according to Section 503.1d 503.1(d) of this
rule, and for which the manufacturer makes no public claims to the public that the gun can be used effectively
above 12 psig (619 mm Hg) (0.8 bar).
251 MARINE VESSEL: A tugboat, tanker, freighter, passenger ship, barge, or other boat, ship or watercraft used
for commercial purposes. This definition excludes those boats used primarily for recreational purposes.
226 252 METAL FURNITURE: Any furniture Furniture made of metal or any metal part which will be assembled
with other parts made of metal or other material(s) to form a furniture piece.

253 METALLIC COATING: A coating that contains more than 5 grams of metal particles per liter of coating as
applied.
254 MILITARY SPECIFICATION COATING: A coating that has a formulation that has been approved by a
United States Military Agency for use on military equipment.
227 MINUS EXEMPT COMPOUNDS or MINUS EXEMPT EVAPORATING COMPONENTS : See VOC
Content Minus Exempt Compounds.
228 255 MOBILE EQUIPMENT: Any equipment Equipment that is physically capable of being driven or
drawn upon on a highway including, but not limited to, the following types of equipment: construction
vehicles (such as mobile cranes, bulldozers, concrete mixers); farming equipment (wheel tractor, plow,
pesticide sprayer); hauling equipment (truck trailers, utility bodies, camper shells); and miscellaneous
equipment (street cleaners, mopeds, golf carts).
256 MOLD-SEAL COATING: The initial coating applied to a new mold or a repaired mold to provide a smooth
surface which, when coated with a mold release coating, prevents products from sticking to the mold.
257 MULTI-COLORED COATING: A coating that is packaged in a single container, applied in a single coat
and exhibits more than one color when applied.
258 MULTI-COMPONENT COATING: A coating requiring the addition of a separate reactive resin,
commonly known as a catalyst or hardener, prior to application to form an acceptable dry film.
229 ORGANIC COMPOUND: Any compound of carbon excluding carbon monoxide, carbon dioxide, carbonic
acid, carbonates, and metallic carbides.
259 ONE-COMPONENT COATING: A coating that is ready for application as it comes out of its container to
form an acceptable dry film. A thinner necessary to reduce the viscosity is not considered a component.
260 OPTICAL COATING: A coating applied to an optical lens.
230 261 OTHER METAL PARTS AND PRODUCTS: Any metal part or product, excluding the following items that
are made of metal: can, coil, furniture, large appliance, aerospace component, metal foil, metal textile fabric,
semiconductor metal, highway vehicle, mobile equipment, an architectural building or structure, a previously
coated marine-vessel.
231 262 OVERVARNISH: Any A coating applied to a can to reduce the coefficient of friction, to provide gloss, or to
protect the finish against abrasion and/or corrosion.
263 PAN BACKING COATING: A coating applied to the surface of pots, pans, or other cooking implements that
are exposed directly to a flame or other heating element.
232 264 PAPER COATING: Any A coating applied on or impregnated into paper, including, but not limited to,
adhesive tapes and labels, book covers, post cards, office copier paper, and drafting paper and pressure sensitive
tapes.
233 265 PLASTIC: Substrates containing made from one or more resins and may be solid, porous, flexible, or rigid.
Plastics include fiber reinforced plastic composites. Any solid, synthetic: resin, polymer, or elastomer, except
rubber. For the purposes of this rule, plastic film is considered film; fabric and paper made of polymeric plastic
fibers are considered fabric and paper, respectively.
266 PLEASURE CRAFT: Vessels which are manufactured or operated primarily for recreational purposes, or
leased, rented, or chartered to a person or business for recreational purposes.
267 PLEASURE CRAFT COATING: A marine coating that is applied to or intended by the manufacturer to
be applied to pleasure craft.
234 POLYESTER AND POLYESTER RESIN: A complex, polymeric ester containing difunctional \
235 POLYESTER COMPOSITE: Cured material made of polyester resin with reinforcing material imbedded in it,
such as glass fibers.
268 PREFABRICATED ARCHITECTURAL COMPONENT COATING: A coating applied to metal parts
and products which are to be used as an architectural structure.

269 PRESSURE SENSITIVE TAPE OR LABEL: A flexible strip of paper, backing material, or other material
that is coated on one side with a permanently tacky adhesive which will adhere to a variety of surfaces with
light pressure.
270 PRETREATMENT COATING: A coating containing no more than 12 percent solids by weight, and at least
½ percent acid, by weight, is used to provide surface etching, and is applied directly to metal surfaces to
provide corrosion resistance, adhesion and ease of stripping.
271 PRETREATMENT WASH PRIMER: A coating that contains no more than 12 percent solids, by weight,
and at least ½ percent acids, by weight, is used to provide surface etching, and is applied directly to fiberglass
and metal surfaces to provide corrosion resistance and adhesion of subsequent coatings.
236 272 PRIMER: A coating applied directly to substrate for any one or combination of the following purposes:
corrosion prevention, protection from the environment, functional fluid resistance, or adhesion of subsequent
coatings.
237 273 QUALITY CLASS Q: Any A system, structure, coating or other component which that, if defective or
inoperable, could cause or increase the severity of a nuclear incident, thereby imposing undue risk to the health
and safety of the public.
238 REFINISHING: Recoating a used object's surface which arrives at the refinisher with a coating or with a
previous coating worn away by use.
239 274 REPAIR COATING: A coating or coating operation used to recoat the portion of a completed finish that
suffered post-production damage at the facility where the finish was applied.
240 RESTRICTED SPRAY GUN: Any air-atomizing spray gun that is not a low pressure spray gun, and any other
coating gun that is not on the list in Section 303.1.
275 SHOCK-FREE COATING: A coating applied to electrical components to protect the user from electric
shock. The coating has characteristics of being of low capacitance and high resistance, and having resistance to
breaking down under high voltage.
241 276 SILICONE RELEASE COATING: Any A resin coating, the major cured portion of which is silicone resin,
having as its primary function the release of food products from metal surfaces such as baking pans.
242 277 SMALL SURFACE-COATING SOURCE (SSCS): A facility from which the total VOC emissions for
all surface coating operations that are subject to this rule without, or prior to, any emission control, is less
than 15 pounds (6.8 kg) per day and less than 2 tons/yr (1814 kg) per year; as demonstrated by both
adequate records of coating and diluent use (pursuant according to Section 501.2 501.2 of this rule) and a
separate tally of the number of days each month that such coating operations occur.
278 SOLAR-ABSORBENT COATING: A coating with the prime purpose of absorption of solar radiation.
279 STENCIL COATING: An ink or a coating that is rolled or brushed onto a template or stamp in order to
add identifying letters, symbols and/or numbers.
243 STRIPPABLE BOOTH COATING: A temporary coating that is applied to spray booth surfaces to receive the
overspray and protect the surfaces, and which is designed to readily be pulled off the substrate in strips or
sheets, and disposed of.
244 280 SURFACE COATING: Any A liquid, fluid, or mastic composition which that is converted to a solid (or semi-
solid) protective, decorative, or adherent film or deposit after application as a thin layer. Surface coating is
generally distinct and different from impregnation and from applying adhesive for bonding purposes.
245 281 SURFACE COATING OPERATION: Preparation, handling, mixing, and application of surface coating, and
cleanup of application equipment and enclosures at a facility where surface coating is applied.
282 TEXTURE COATING: A coating that is applied which, in its finished form, consists of discrete raised
spots of the coating.
246 283 THREE-PIECE CAN SIDE-SEAM COAT COATING: Any A coating sprayed onto the interior and/or
exterior of a can body seam on a three-piece can to protect the exposed metal.
247 284 TOPCOAT: The final, permanent, coating-formulation coating formulation that completed completes the
finish on a surface.

248 TOTAL VOC VAPOR PRESSURE (VOC COMPOSITE PARTIAL PRESSURE): The sum of the partial
pressures of the compounds defined as VOCs, calculated according to the formula in Section 504 of this
rule.
249 285 TOUCH-UP COATING: A coating used to cover minor coating imperfections after the main coating
operation. This includes touch-up coating that accompanies the purchase of an object already coated with that
coating.
286 TRANSFER EFFICIENCY: The ratio of the weight of coating solids adhering to the part being coated, to the
weight of coating solids used in the application process expressed as a percentage.
250 287 TWO-PIECE CAN EXTERIOR END COAT COATING: Any A coating applied to the exterior end of a
can to provide protection to the metal.
288 VACUUM-METALIZING COATING: The undercoat applied to the substrate on which the metal is
deposited or the overcoat is applied directly to the metal film. Vacuum metalizing/ physical vapor deposition
(PVD) is the process whereby the metal is vaporized and deposited in a substrate in a vacuum chamber.
251 VINYL COATING (COATING ON VINYL): Any decorative or protective coating or reinforcing coating
applied over vinyl-coated textile fabric or vinyl sheets.
252 VOC-BORNE COATING: A coating that contains more VOC than water, by weight.
253 VOC-BORNE DILUENT: A solvent or other diluent that contains more VOC than water, by weight
254.2 289 VOC ACTUAL: VOC CONTENT OF MATERIAL (MATERIAL VOC-CONTENT) Actual includes the
VOC Content minus all The weight of volatile organic compounds minus the weight of water and minus
the weight of exempt organic compounds divided by the total volume of the materials. Units of VOC actual
are in pounds of VOC per gallon (or grams per liter) of material and shall be calculated using the following
equation:
W s − W w − W es
VOC Actual Content of Material Cleaners or Reducers =
V m
Using consistently either English or metric measures in the calculations, where:
Ws = weight of all volatile material in pounds (or grams) including VOC, water, non-precursor organic
compounds (Section 261) and dissolved vapors
Ww = weight of water in pounds (or grams)
Wes = weight of all non-precursor organic compounds in pounds (or grams)
Vm = volume of total material in gallons (or liters)
254 290 VOC CONTENT: In this rule, VOC content is determined by one of the following two formulas: To
determine compliance with Table 1 or the 2.0 lb VOC/gal threshold in Section 302, use the following formula
in subsection 255.1; For other purposes, use the formula in subsection 255.2: The organic chemicals in a
material that have a vapor pressure at ordinary room temperature. This vapor pressure results from a low
boiling point, which causes large numbers of molecules to evaporate or sublimate from the liquid or solid
form of the compound and enter the surrounding air. The term VOC content is a general term used
throughout the rule and includes VOC, VOC actual and VOC regulatory.
254.1 291 VOC REGULATORY: VOC Content Minus Exempt Compounds (is the same as VOC CONTENT MINUS
EXEMPT EVAPORATING COMPONENTS) The VOC content The weight of volatile organic compounds
minus the weight of water and minus the weight of exempt compounds divided by the volume of material
minus the volume of water and minus the volume of exempt compounds. Units of VOC regulatory are in
pounds of VOC per gallon (or grams per liter) of material and shall be calculated using the following
equation:

W s − W w − W es
VOC Content Minus Exempt Compounds VOC Regulatory = V − V − V
m w es
Using consistently either English or metric measures in the calculations, where:
Ws
= weight of all volatile material in pounds (or grams), including VOC, water, non-precursor organic
compounds and dissolved vapors
Ww
= weight of water in pounds (or grams)
Wes
= weight of all non-precursor organic compounds in pounds (or grams)
Vm
= volume of total material in gallons (or liters)
Vw
= volume of water in gallons (or liters)
Ves
= volume of all non-precursor organic compounds in gallons (or liters)
SECTION 300 – STANDARDS
301 SURFACE COATINGS: A person An owner or operator shall comply with one of the following for all
applications of surface coatings:
301.1 Meet the limits in Table 1 Tables 336-1 through 336-7 of this rule. Coating limits are calculated as
VOC Regulatory (as applied). Compliance will be determined based on the VOC content limit, as
expressed in metric units. English units are provided for information only; or
301.2 Operate an Emission Control System (ECS) in accordance with subsection 306.1 Section 305 of
this rule when applying a coating that exceeds the VOC limits in Table 1 Tables 336-1 through
336-7 of this rule.; or All VOC coatings used that exceed the VOC limits in Tables 336-1 through
336-7 of this rule shall be clearly labeled such that coating-operators are informed that an ECS
must be used during application of surface coatings.
301.3 Qualify for an exemption under Section 305 Sections 103 or 104 of this rule.
TABLE 1
SURFACE COATING EMISSION LIMITS
TYPE OF SURFACE COATING LIMITS AS APPLIED:
VOC content minus exempt
compounds (see subsection
255.1)
Column I Column II
lbs/gal g/liter
Can Coating
Sheet Basecoat (Exterior and Interior) and Overvarnish 2.8 340
Two-Piece Can Exterior (Basecoat and Overvarnish) 2.8 340
Two and Three-Piece Can Interior Body Spray 4.2 510
Two-Piece Can Exterior End (Spray or Roll Coat) 4.2 510
Three-Piece Can Side-Seam Spray 5.5 660

End Sealing Compound 3.7 440
Can Printing Ink 2.5 300
Coil Coating (any coat) 2.6 310
Metal Furniture Coating 3.0 360
Large Appliance Coating 2.8 340
OTHER METAL PARTS AND PRODUCTS COATING (As defined in Section 231)
The following includes Non-adhesive Coating, Adhesive, Adhesive Primer, Caulking, and Beaded Sealants:
Air-Dried Coating 3.5 420
Baked Coating [above 200°F (93°C)] 3.0 360
Silicone Release Coating: Baked or Air-Dried 3.5 420
Fabric Coating 2.9 350
Film Coating 2.9 350
COATING PLASTIC PARTS AND PRODUCTS THAT ARE NOT DEFINED AS
FLEXIBLE
3.5 420
COATING FLEXIBLE PLASTIC PARTS AND PRODUCTS
Primer 4.1 490
Color Topcoat 3.8 450
Basecoat/Clear Coat (Combined System) - Limit for either coat 4.5 540
Paper Coating, including Adhesives 2.9 350
Vinyl Coating (Coating on Vinyl) 3.8 450
STRIPPABLE BOOTH COATINGS 2.0 240
Table 336-1: Coating Limits for Metal Parts and Products
Coating Category Air Dried Baked
g VOC/l lb VOC/gal g VOC/l lb VOC/gal
Camouflage 420 3.5 420 3.5
Drum Coating, New, Exterior 340 2.8 340 2.8
Drum Coating, New, Interior 420 3.5 420 3.5
Drum Coating, Reconditioned, Exterior 420 3.5 420 3.5
Drum Coating, Reconditioned, Interior 500 4.2 500 4.2
Electric-Insulating Varnish 420 3.5 420 3.5
Etching Filler 420 3.5 420 3.5
Extreme High-Gloss 420 3.5 360 3.0
Extreme Performance 420 3.5 360 3.0
Heat-Resistant 420 3.5 360 3.0

Coating Category Air Dried Baked
g VOC/l lb VOC/gal g VOC/l lb VOC/gal
High Performance Architectural 740 6.2 740 6.2
High Temperature 420 3.5 420 3.5
Metallic 420 3.5 420 3.5
Military Specification 340 2.8 280 2.3
Mold-Seal Coating 420 3.5 420 3.5
Other Metal Parts And Products Coating: 420 3.5
Includes Non-Adhesive Coatings, Caulking,
And Beaded Sealants: Air Dried
Other Metal Parts And Products Coating: 360 3.0
Includes Non-Adhesive Coatings, Caulking,
And Beaded Sealants: Baked Coating Above
200°F (93°C)
Pan Backing 420 3.5 420 3.5
Prefabricated Architectural Multi- 420 3.5 280 2.3
Component
Prefabricated Architectural One- 420 3.5 280 2.3
Component
Pretreatment Coating 420 3.5 420 3.5
Repair 420 3.5 360 3.0
Touch-up 420 3.5 360 3.0
Silicone Release 420 3.5 420 3.5
Solar-Absorbent 420 3.5 360 3.0
Vacuum-Metalizing 420 3.5 420 3.5
Table 336-2: Coating Limits for Can and Coil Coating
Coating Category g VOC/l lb VOC/gal
Can Coating
Can Printing Ink 300 2.5
Coil Coating 310 2.6
End Sealing Compound 440 3.7
Fabric Coating 350 2.9
Film Coating 350 2.9
Sheet Basecoat (Exterior and Interior) and Overvarnish 340 2.8
Three-Piece Can Side-Seam Spray 660 5.5
Two and Three-Piece Can Interior Body Spray 510 4.2
Two-Piece Can Exterior (Basecoat and Overvarnish) 340 2.8
Two-Piece Can Exterior End (Spray or Roll Coat) 510 4.2

Table 336-3: Coating Limits for Plastic Parts and Products
Coating Category g VOC/l lb VOC/gal
Electric Dissipating Coatings and Shock-Free Coatings 800 6.7
Extreme Performance 420 3.5
(2-pack coatings) (2-pack coatings)
Metallic 420 3.5
Military Specification 340 (1 pack) 2.8 (1 pack)
420 (2 pack) 3.5 (2 pack)
Mold-Seal Coating 760 6.3
Multi-Colored Coating 680 5.7
Optical Coatings 800 6.7
Vacuum-Metalizing 800 6.7
Table 336-4: Coating Limits for Business Machine Coatings
Coating Category g VOC/l lb VOC/gal
Fog Coat 260 2.2
Primer 350 2.9
Repair 350 2.9
Texture Coating 350 2.9
Topcoat 350 2.9
Touch-up 350 2.9
Table 336-5: Coating Limits for Metal Furniture and Large Appliance Coatings
Coating Category Air Dried Baked
g VOC/l lb VOC/gal g VOC/l lb VOC/gal
Extreme High Gloss 340 2.8 360 3.0
Extreme Performance 420 3.5 360 3.0
Heat-Resistant 420 3.5 360 3.0
Large Appliance 275 2.3 275 2.3
Metallic 420 3.5 420 3.5
Multi-Component 340 2.8 275 2.3
One-Component 275 2.3 275 2.3
Pretreatment Coating 420 3.5 420 3.5
Refrigerated Glass Door Coatings -- -- 480 4.0
Solar-Absorbent 420 3.5 360 3.0
Table 336-6: Coating Limits for Paper, Film, and Foil Surface Coating

kg VOC/kg Coating kg VOC/kg Solids
Coating Category
(lb VOC/lb solids) (lb VOC/lb solids)
Paper, Film, And Foil Surface
Coating (Not Including Pressure 0.08 0.40
Sensitive Tape And Label)
Pressure Sensitive Tape And Label 0.067 0.20
Surface Coating
Table 336-7: Coating Limits for Pleasure Craft Surface Coating
[Date of Adoption] On and After [Date 12 Months After
Date of Adoption]
Coating Category g VOC/l lbs VOC/gal g VOC/l Lbs VOC/gal
All Other Pleasure Craft Surface 420 3.5 420 3.5
Coatings For Metal Or Plastic
Aluminum Substrate Antifoulant 560 4.7 560 4.7
Coating
Antifouling Sealer/Tie Coat 420 3.5 420 3.5
Extreme High Gloss Topcoat 600 5.2 490 4.1
Finish Primer/Surfacer 600 5.2 420 3.5
High Build Primer/Surfacer 340 2.8 340 2.8
High Gloss Topcoat 420 3.5 420 3.5
Other Substrate Antifoulant 400 3.4 330 2.7
Coating
Pretreatment Wash Primer 780 6.5 780 6.5
302 APPLICATION METHODS FOR SURFACE COATINGS:
302.1 A person An owner or operator shall employ use one of the following methods for all applications
of surface coating materials containing more than 2 pounds of VOC per gallon (240 g/L), minus
exempt compounds (VOC regulatory):
302.1 a. A HVLP spray gun; or
302.2 b. An Electrostatic system; or
302.3 c. A system that atomizes principally by hydraulic pressure, including “airless” and “air assisted
airless”;
302.4 d. HVLP Spray- Gun; Non-atomizing or non-spraying application methods, such as but not
limited to dipping, rolling, or brushing; or Hand Application Methods, including but not
limited to;
e. (1) Flow Coat;
f. (2) Roll Coat;
g. (3) Dip-Coating;
h. Hand Application Methods;

302.5 e. An Alternative Application Method: Any method approved by the Administrator of the
Federal EPA or the Control Officer as having a transfer efficiency of 65% or greater as
HVLP-equivalent.
302.2 An owner or operator is allowed to use an application method other than that described in Section
302.1 of this rule:
a. For applications of surface coating containing less than or equal to 2 pounds of VOC per
gallon (240 g/L), minus exempt compounds (VOC regulatory).
b. For applications of surface coating containing more than 2 pounds of VOC per gallon (240
g/L), minus exempt compounds (VOC regulatory):
(1) If VOC emissions from the finishing application are captured and directed to an ECS
complying with the provisions of Section 305 of this rule; or
(2) If coating the inside of pipes and tubes with a wand-style applicator; or
(3) If using an airbrush or other small gun that has a reservoir capacity not exceeding 250 cc
(8.8 fl. oz.) and is used solely for detailing, lettering, touch-up, and/or repair.
303 CLEANUP OF APPLICATION EQUIPMENT: A person An owner or operator shall comply with the
following when using VOC-containing material to clean application equipment:
303.1 Disassemble any spray gun and other application equipment and clean it in:
a. A container which remains covered at all times, except when the application equipment is
being handled in the container, or transferred into or out of the container; or
b. A commercially-sold gun cleaning machine which shall be operated and maintained as
stipulated in the Air Pollution Permit’s Operation and Maintenance (O&M) Plan, or in the
absence of its mention in the O&M Plan, according to manufacturer’s or distributor’s
instructions.
303.2 Vapor Pressure Limits: Any person subject to this rule using VOC-solvent to clean coating
application equipment shall use only solvent which, as used, has a VOC-vapor pressure below 35
mm Hg at 20° C (68° F), except for sprayless equipment exempted pursuant to subsection
303.1 Spray-Gun Cleaning Requirements:
a. Clean spray-guns without spraying or atomizing a solvent cleaner with the gun.
b. Spray-Gun Cleaning Machine: Use a spray-gun cleaning machine that complies with the
following requirements unless the owner or operator complies with the manual spray-gun
cleaning requirements in Section 303.2 of this rule.
(1) Spray-Gun Cleaning Machine-General Requirements: The spray-gun cleaning
machine shall meet all of the following requirements:
(a) Be designed to clean spray-guns.
(b) Have at least one pump that drives solvent cleaner through and over the spray-gun.
(c) Have a basin which permits containment of the solvent cleaner.
(d) Be kept in proper repair and free from liquid leaks.
(e) Shall be fitted with a cover.
(f) Be located on-site where the spray application occurs; and
(g) Be operated and maintained according to manufacturer’s or distributor’s instructions.
(h) Porous Material:
(1) Do not clean nor use porous or absorbent materials to clean parts or products in
a cleaning machine. For the purpose of this rule, porous or absorbent materials
include, but are not limited to, cloth, leather, wood, and rope.

(2) Do not place an object with a sealed wood handle, including a brush, in or on a
cleaning machine.
(3) Do not place porous or absorbent materials, including, but not limited to, cloth,
leather, wood, and rope in or on a cleaning machine.
(2) Automatic Spray-Gun Cleaning Machine: An automatic spray-gun cleaning machine
shall have a self-covering or enclosing cover feature that in the cover's closed position
allows no gaps exceeding 1/8 inch (3 mm) between the cover and the cabinet. This self-
enclosing feature shall be maintained and consistently cover or enclose to these gap
limits.
(3) Non-Automatic Remote Reservoir Spray-Gun Cleaning Machine: Non-automatic
Remote Reservoir Spray-Gun Cleaning Machine Cleaning Machine shall meet all of the
following requirements:
(a) Drain solvent cleaner from the sink/work-space quickly into a remote reservoir when
work-space is not in use;
(b) Machine reservoir shall not have cumulative total openings, including the drain
opening(s) exceeding two square inches in area; and so that the reservoir will not
allow VOC vapors to escape to the atmosphere; and
(c) Allow a machine design in which The base of the sink/work-space may function as
the reservoir's top surface, as long as the fit/seal between sink base and reservoir
container allows the reservoir to meet the opening limits specified in Section
303.1(b)(3)(b) of this rule.
303.2 Manual Spray-Gun Cleaning Requirements: An owner or operator manually cleaning spray-
guns shall comply with the following requirements:
a. Disassembled spray-guns must be cleaned by non-mechanical, hand-held method of
application of cleaners including but not limited to paint brushes, hand rollers, caulking guns,
trowels, spatulas, syringe daubers, rags, and sponges;
b. If disassembled spray-guns must be are soaked in a vat which they shall remain covered at all
times, except when the application equipment is being handled in the container, or transferred
into or out of the container;
304 WORK PRACTICES-HANDLING, DISPOSAL AND STORAGE OF VOC-CONTAINING
MATERIAL: An owner or operator of any surface coating facility shall store, handle, and dispose of
VOC-containing material in a manner that prevents the evaporation of VOC to the atmosphere. Work
practices limiting VOC emissions include but are not limited to all of the following:
304.1 Use and Storage: An owner or operator shall cover and keep covered each VOC-containing
material which is not currently in use. A person shall store finishing and cleaning materials in
closed or covered leak-free containers.
304.2 Disposal of VOC-Containing Material: An owner or operator shall store all VOC-containing
materials intended for disposal including, but not limited to, rags, waste coatings, waste brushes,
waste rollers, waste applicators, waste solvents, and their residues, in closed, leak free containers.
The containers shall remain covered with a leak tight cover, when not in use.
304.3 Minimize spills of VOC-containing coatings, thinners, and coating-related waste materials.
304.4 Convey VOC-containing coatings, thinners, and coating-related waste materials from one location
to another in closed containers or pipes.
304.5 Containers in which VOC-containing materials are stored must have a legible label identifying the
container’s contents.
305 EXEMPTIONS:
305.1 Categorical Exemptions: This rule does not apply to the following operations:
a. Aerospace coating operations (Rule 348).

b. Architectural coating, including buildings and erected structures (Rule 335).
c. Cleaning: VOC loss from cleaning or stripping a surface for coating or other purpose is
regulated by Rule 331.
d. Marine vessel exterior refinishing.
e. Polyester coatings applied to polyester composites.
f. Printing and graphic arts coating (Rule 337).
g. Semiconductor manufacturing (Rule 338).
h. Coating a highway vehicle or mobile equipment (Rule 345).
i. Wood: Coating Wood Furniture (Rule 342); Coating Wood Millwork (Rule 346).
305.2 Exemptions for Qualified Materials: Rule 336 does not apply to the following materials that meet
the specific qualification(s) and limitation(s) set forth herein:
a. Leak-Preventing Materials: Sealants, adhesives, caulking, and similar materials used on the
following substrates for the primary purpose of leak prevention are exempt from this rule:
(1) Non-metallic substrates; and
(2) Used substrates, post manufacture, such as, but not limited to, old joints and seals on pipe
and valve assemblies.
b. Adhesive Use:
(1) Adhesive and adhesive primer applications are exempt from this rule, except for the 2
categories that appear in Table 1, namely adhesive materials applied to other metal parts
and products (as defined in Section 231), and adhesives used in paper coating (as defined
in Section 233).
(2) Any adhesive exempted by this Rule 336 and to which no other rule in Regulation III
specifically applies shall comply with the provisions of Rule 330 (Volatile Organic
Compounds) of these Rules & Regulations.
c. Certain Joint Fillers: Caulking and beaded sealants used to fill gaps or to fill joints between
surfaces are exempt from this rule, except those used in manufacturing other metal parts and
products as defined in Section 231 of this rule, or in the manufacturing of cans.
d. Extreme Performance Coatings: Extreme performance coatings are exempt from the VOC
limits of Table 1 when used under the following conditions:
(1) Used on internal combustion engine components that are normally above 250°F (121°C)
during use; or
(2) Used at temperatures above 250°F (121°C) on items that are both included under SIC
(Standard Industrial Classification, 1987) codes 3661, 3663, 3669, 3677, 3678, 3679, or
3769 and are electronic products in space vehicles and/or are communications equipment.
The US Government Printing Office “Standard Industrial Classification Manual, 1987”
(and no future editions) is incorporated by reference and is on file at the Maricopa
County Air Quality Department, 1001 N. Central Ave., Phoenix, Arizona 85004.
305.3 ECS Use In Lieu Of Equipment/Practice: In lieu of meeting an equipment or work practice
standard within Sections 302, 303, or 304, an owner or operator is allowed to instead use an ECS
that has a capture efficiency not less than 90% and meets all ECS requirements in Section 306.
305.4 Spray-Gun And VOC-Limit Exemptions: The following are exempt from subsection 301.1,
subsection 301.2, and Section 302 of this rule:
a. Coating with an aerosol can.
b. Touch up or repair-coating operations as defined in Sections 250 and 240.

c. Low usage coatings which in aggregate of all formulations do not exceed 55 gallons (208
liters) per year facility-wide if the operator updates usage records of these coatings on each
day of their use, pursuant to subsection 501.2.
d. A small surface-coating source (SSCS) as defined in Section 243. However, once a small
surface-coating source exceeds either the 15 lb per day or the 2 tons per year limits that are
required to maintain SSCS status that facility is permanently subject to the limits of
subsection 301.1, subsection 301.2, and Section 302, with the following exception:
(1) For such a facility that does not have either a 15 lb/day or a 2 ton/year VOC-emission
limit in an Air Pollution Permit for processes regulated by this rule, an owner or operator
may retain the exemption if s/he agrees in writing to enforceable permit conditions that
establish these or stricter limits.
(2) However, a facility that violates its permit limit of either 15 lbs VOC/day or 2 tons
VOC/yr. for coating process regulated by this Rule 336 is permanently subject to the
limits of subsections 301.1 and 301.2, and Section 302.
e. A Quality Class Q protective coating that is used on equipment, structures, and/or components
within a containment facility of a nuclear power plant and is approved in accordance with
either ANSI standards N101.2 and N101.4 or with ASTM Standards D3911 and D3843.
f. A tactical military-equipment coating that is approved in a Maricopa County Air Pollution
Permit subsequent to a sufficient demonstration by the user that no compliant substitute
exists.
305.5 Special Facilities/Operations:
a. Silicone Release Coatings: Silicone release coating operations controlled by an ECS pursuant
to subsection 301.2 are exempt from the 85 percent overall control efficiency requirement if
the ECS demonstrates at least 70 percent overall control and the coating is applied with a
liquid seal air spray system.
b. Bonding Impact Resistant Rubber Lining To Metal: An adhesive and an adhesive-primer are
exempt from Table 1 limits, but shall not have a VOC content of material exceeding 850
grams of VOC per liter (7.1 lb/gal), if such adhesive is used to bond sheets/strips of rubber to
metal equipment so that such rubber sheathing directly contacts material received by the metal
and so protects the metal. This exception does not apply to any other situations where
adhesives are used to bond rubber to metal.
305.6 Exemption Of Coating Applicator Cleanup: A person is allowed to use solvent that has at 20° C
(68° F) a total VOC vapor pressure above 35 mm Hg for cleaning coating-application equipment,
but only if such application equipment does not use spray devices and the same principal solvent
is used for cleaning as is used in the coating.
305.7 Low-Usage Allowance for Restricted Guns: A person may employ spray guns otherwise
prohibited by Section 302 for use with coatings over 2 lb VOC /gal under the following limited
conditions:
a. If VOC emissions from the finishing application station, are captured and directed to an ECS
complying with the provisions of Section 306.
b. To coat the inside of pipes and tubes with a wand-style applicator.
c. Using an airbrush or other small gun that has a reservoir capacity not exceeding 250 cc (8.8
fluid ounces) and is used solely for detailing, lettering, touchup, and/or repair.
306 305 REQUIREMENTS FOR AIR POLLUTION CONTROL EQUIPMENT AND EMISSION CONTROL
SYSTEM (ECS) MONITORING EQUIPMENT REQUIREMENTS:
306.1 305.1 ECS Control Efficiencies: To meet the requirements pursuant to subsection 301.2, subsection
305.3, or subsection 305.7, Section 301.2 of this rule, an ECS shall be operated as follows:
a. Overall ECS Efficiency: For a facility that chooses to use add-on controls instead of meeting
the limits in Tables 336-1 through 336-7 of this rule and specified application methods, a 90

percent overall VOC control efficiency is required. Overall, the ECS shall prevent at least
85% of the mass of the VOC emitted by each coating or process so controlled from entering
the atmosphere except as successfully controlled pursuant to the alternative in subsection
306.1c(2).
b. Capture and Control Efficiencies Efficiency:
(1) For an ECS used pursuant to subsection 301.2 and/or subsection 305.7, capture shall be at
least 87%.
(2) For an ECS used pursuant to subsection 305.3, capture shall be at least 90%.
c. Control Efficiency Of The Emissions Processing Subsystem:
(1) The emissions-processing subsystem of the ECS shall reduce the mass of VOC entering it
by at least 90 percent; or
The overall efficiency of an ECS is equal to the capture efficiency multiplied by control
efficiency so any combination of capture and controls that achieves this overall control is
compliant.
(2) c. Alternative for Very Dilute Input: For VOC input-concentrations of less than 100 ppm (as
carbon) at the inlet of the ECS emissions processing subsystem, an ECS’ VOC processing
subsystem also satisfies the processor efficiency requirements of this rule if:
(a) The VOC output is consistently less than 20 mg VOC/M3 m3 (as carbon) adjusted to
standard conditions; and
(b) The ECS consistently shows an overall control efficiency of at least 85% 90% when
tested pursuant to subsection 503.3 Section 503.3 of this rule, at VOC input-
concentrations exceeding 100 ppm (as carbon).
d. Coating that exceeds the applicable VOC-limits in Table 1 shall be clearly identified such that
coating-operators are informed an ECS must be used.
306.2 305.2 Operation and Maintenance (O&M) Plan Required for ECS:
a. An owner or operator shall provide and maintain (an) O&M Plan(s) for any ECS, any other
emission processing equipment, and any ECS monitoring devices that are used pursuant to
this Rule 336 rule or to an air pollution control permit.
b. The owner or operator shall submit to the Control Officer for approval the O&M Plans of
each ECS and each ECS monitoring device that is used pursuant to this Rule 336 rule.
c. The owner or operator shall comply with all the identified actions and schedules provided in
each O&M Plan.
306.3 305.3 Providing and Maintaining ECS Monitoring Devices: Any person owner or operator
incinerating, adsorbing, or otherwise processing VOC emissions pursuant to this rule shall
provide, properly install and maintain in calibration, in good working order and in operation,
devices described in the facility’s O&M Plan that indicate temperatures, pressures, rates of flow,
or other operating conditions necessary to determine if air pollution control equipment is
functioning properly and is properly maintained. Records shall be kept pursuant to Section 502
which demonstrate that the ECS meets the overall control standard required by subsection 306.1
Section 305.1 of this rule and is operated in accordance with the equipment manufacturer's
specifications.
306.4 305.4 O&M Plan Responsibility: An owner or operator of a facility that is required to have an O&M
Plan pursuant to subsection 306.2 Section 305.2 must fully comply with all O&M Plans that the
owner or operator has submitted for approval, but which have not yet been approved, unless
notified otherwise by the Control Officer in writing. If revisions to the plan have been submitted
and not yet been approved by the Control Officer, then an owner or operator shall comply with the
most recent O&M plan on file at Maricopa County Air Quality Department.
305.5 Operation and Maintenance (O&M) Plan Contents for an ECS: An O&M Plan for any ECS
including any ECS monitoring devices shall include all of the following information:

a. ECS equipment manufacturer;
b. ECS equipment model;
c. ECS equipment identification number or identifier that owner or operator subject to this
rule assigns to such ECS equipment when manufacturer’s equipment identification
number is unknown; and
d. Information required by Sections 502 and 503 of this rule.
SECTION 400 – ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS
401 COMPLIANCE SCHEDULE VOC LIMITS:
401.1 Emission Control System (ECS): By August 1, 1999: An owner or operator installing an ECS
shall:
a. All new Implement all recordkeeping provisions shall be in effect, including subsections
501.1c and 501.2a Section 502 of this rule.
b. Announce the The intention to use an Emission Control System ( ECS ) shall be announced to
the Control Officer in writing if:
(1) The the ECS is used as an alternative to meeting the spray-gun provisions VOC limits of
Section 302 301.1 of this rule. or
(2) The ECS is used as an alternative to meeting the gun cleaning machine provisions of
Section 303.
401.2 Spray-Guns: By November 1, 1999 , the following shall be in continuing use:
a. Spray guns required pursuant to Section 302;
b. Cleaning-solvent(s) having the required vapor pressure pursuant to Section 303, and the data
sheet(s) confirming the vapor pressure.
401.3 By May 1, 2000, the ECS announced pursuant to subsection 401.1b shall be in continuing use.
401.2 VOC Limits and Rule Requirements: Upon adoption of this rule, the owner or operator shall
discontinue purchase of materials that are non-compliant with Section 301.1 of this rule. The owner or
operator has up to [Date 6 Months After Rule Adoption] to complete use of existing non-compliant
materials already purchased. A schedule for phasing out non-compliant materials shall be prepared
and made available to an inspector upon request. This schedule shall specify that only compliant
materials will be used after [Date 6 Months After Rule Adoption].
402 COMPLIANCE SCHEDULE O&M PLAN: O&M Plans for ECS equipment subject to this rule shall be
revised/updated by [Date 3 Months After Rule Adoption]. The Control Officer shall notify the applicant in
writing of approval or denial.
SECTION 500 – MONITORING AND RECORDS
501 RECORDKEEPING AND REPORTING: Any person The owner or operator subject to this rule shall
comply with the following recordkeeping requirements: of subsections 501.1 and 501.2 that apply to
materials regulated by this rule.
501.1 The type and amount used of each VOC-containing coating which is regulated by name or type in
Tables 336-1 through 336-7 of this rule, and update each VOC-containing material, related to
surface coating, that is not addressed by these tables. This includes, but is not limited to, thinners,
surfacers, and diluents.
501.1 Records shall be retained for five years and shall be made available to the Control Officer without
delay upon verbal or written request.
501.1 501.2 Current Lists:
a. Maintain a current list of coatings, adhesives, reducers, thinners, gun-cleaning materials,
additives, and any or any other VOC-containing materials regulated by this rule. This
list: give the

a. VOC content of material for each as received (before thinning). A complete, neat assemblage
of this data meets the requirements for a list. Shall Express express VOC content in 1 of 3
one of the following forms:
(1) pounds Pounds VOC per gallon,;
(2) grams Grams VOC per liter,; or
(3) The percent VOC by weight along with the specific gravity or density ((2) numbers are
required).
b. Shall have the written value of the VOC coating, in one of the following forms. The
documentation must provide accurate VOC content values or be based on enforceable test
methods as approved by the Administrator to determine the VOC content.
(1) A manufacturer’s technical data sheet;
(2) A manufacturer’s safety data sheet (SDS or MSDS); or
(3) Actual test results.
b. Less Stringent Recordkeeping for Consistently Low Users: An operator of a facility that
always uses less than 2 gallons per day total of thinner and coating (listed in Table 1), meets
the listing and recording requirements of subsections 501.1(a), 501.1(c), and 501.2 of this
rule if:
(1) All purchase receipts/invoices of VOC-containing material that is regulated by this rule
for the most recent 12 months are kept together; and
(2) Current data sheets show the VOC content of material for every VOC containing
substance currently used that is regulated by this rule.
c. Shall maintain usage or purchase records as follows:
(1) Monthly: Records of the amount of VOC-containing materials purchased or used shall
be totaled by the end of month for the previous month. This includes but is not limited to,
all coating materials, all materials added during preparation of coatings, all materials used
to clean coating application equipment, and all materials used to clean coating application
areas (spray booths).
(2) Grouping by VOC Content: For purposes of recording usage, an operator may give
VOC coatings, cleaners, and solvents of similar VOC content (VOC Regulatory) a single
group-name, distinct from any product names in the group. The total usage of all the
products in that group is then recorded under just one name. (In such a case, the operator
must also keep a separate list that identifies the product names of the particular solvents
included under the group name). To the group name shall be assigned the highest VOC
content (VOC Regulatory) among the members of that group, rounded to the nearest 10th
of a pound of VOC per gallon of material, or to the nearest gram VOC per liter of
material.
c. Facilities that Are Not Small Surface-Coating Sources: Facilities that are not small surface-
coating sources shall do the following:
(1) Coatings: For all coatings (except those recorded under the subsection 305.4(c) make
(d) Shall make the following listings for all coatings and adhesives that have VOC limits listed
in Table 1 Tables 336-1 through 336-7 of this rule:
(a) (1) VOC Before Reducing: The VOC content of each coating as received, minus exempt
compounds. This figure is sometimes called the “EPA Method 24” VOC content on
manufacturer’s data sheets. If the coating is a multi-part coating, list the manufacturer’s
final VOC content which the manufacturer states the coating will have once you have
mixed all the necessary parts together in the proportions specified by the manufacturer.
(b) (2) List Maximum VOC Content of Coating As Applied: For each coating that you
is thin/reduce or add any additive to, thinned/reduced or additive is introduced, record in

a permanent log either of the following: the VOC content, after mixing the maximum
amount of thinner/reducer and other additives, as determined by the formula in the
definition of VOC Regulatory of this rule. This log will include the following:
(i) (a) The maximum number of fluid ounces thinner/reducer that you ever added to a
gallon of unreduced coating (or maximum g/liter), and the maximum fluid ounces of
every other additive you mix mixed into a gallon of the coating; or
(ii) (b) The VOC content of the coating, after adding the maximum amount of
thinner/reducer and other additives that you would ever add, added as determined by
the formula in subsection 255.1 the definition of VOC Regulatory in this rule.
e. Shall maintain usage or purchase records for aerosol spray cans, including VOC content.
(2) Applicator Cleanup Solvent: Have a hardcopy of the VOC vapor pressure (VP) at 20°C
(68°F) of solvent(s) used to clean spray guns, hoses, reservoirs, and any other coating
application equipment. Any one of the following ways of providing the VP data is
sufficient:
(a) A current manufacturer’s technical data sheet;
(b) A current manufacturer’s safety data sheet (MSDS);
(c) Actual test results; or
(d) A letter signed by an official or lab manager of the supplying facility.
501.2 Frequency of Updating Usage or Purchase Records: Update your records, showing the type and
amount used of each VOC-containing coating or adhesive which is regulated by name or type in
Table 1, and update each VOC-containing material, related to surface coating, that is not
addressed by Table 1. This includes, but is not limited to, thinners, surfacers, and diluents.
Maintain records according to the following schedule:
a. Small Surface-Coating Sources: Small surface-coating sources shall update each month’s
records of coating use by the end of the following month.
b. All Other Sources: For a source that does not meet the definition of small surface-coating
source,
(1) Monthly: Monthly update records of each coating used that complies with the VOC limits
in Table 1. Complete a month’s update by the end of the following month.
(2) Daily: Daily update the usage of each coating that exceeds its limits in Table 1, including
coating exempted by subsection 305.4c.
501.3 Grouping By VOC Content: For purposes of recording usage, coatings and adhesives that are in
the same category in Table 1, and have similar VOC content, may be recorded under a name that
includes the category name. The highest VOC content among the members of that grouping shall
be assigned to that grouping, rounded to the nearest 10th of a pound. To identify what products
belong within each group, after each group name and the group’s VOC content of material must
appear the name of each product in the group and its VOC content of material. For example: For
flexible plastic parts, you use 20 gallons of primer that has 3.04 lb VOC/gal., 30 gallons of primer
having 3.14 lb VOC/gal., and 40 gallons of primer having 2.89 lb VOC/gal. You may record usage
as 90 gallons of flexible plastic primer containing 3.1 lb VOC/gal. If grams VOC per liter is used
to record VOC content, round off to the nearest whole number of grams.
502 ECS RECORDING REQUIREMENTS: An owner or operator shall maintain all of the following records
in accordance with an approved O&M Plan for any ECS:
502.1 On each day an ECS is used at a facility pursuant to this rule, an the owner or operator of the
facility shall make a permanent record of the key system operating parameters as required by the
O&M Plan, including but not limited to the following:
a. Record the amount and VOC content of coating, the amount of catalyst/hardener, and the
amounts of solvent, reducer, and diluent used that were subject to ECS control pursuant to this
Rule 336; and

b. Make a permanent record of the operating parameters of the key systems as required by the
O&M Plan; and
a. Flow rates;
b. Pressure drops;
c. Temperature; or
d. Other operating conditions necessary to determine if the approved ECS is functioning
properly.
502.2 An explanation shall be recorded for periods of time an approved ECS is not operating.
c. 502.3 For each day or period the O & M Plan requires maintenance, the owner or operator shall Make
make a permanent record of the maintenance actions, taken within 24 hours of the action’s
maintenance completion. for each day or period in which the O&M Plan requires that
maintenance be done.
502.4 Corrective action taken, if any.
502.2 502.5 An explanation shall be entered for scheduled maintenance that is not performed during the period
designated for it in the O&M Plan.
503 COMPLIANCE DETERMINATION AND TEST METHODS: When more than one test method is
permitted for a determination, an exceedance of the limits established in the rule determined by any of the
applicable test methods constitutes a violation of this rule.
503.1 Compliance Determination: The following means shall be used to determine compliance with
this rule.
a. Measurement of VOC content of materials subject to Section 301 or Section 302 of this rule
shall be conducted and reported using one of the following means:
(1) VOC content of coatings, solvents, and other substances having less than 5% solids will
be determined by the test method in subsection 503.2f Sections 504.2(f) of this rule
(BAAQMD Method 31 [April 15, 1992]) or 503.2g 504.2(g) (SCAQMD Method 313-91
[April 1997]) of this rule.
(2) The VOC content of coatings or other materials having 5% or more solids will be
determined by the test method in subsection 503.2c Sections 504.2(c) (EPA Method
24), 503.2f 504.2(f) (BAAQMD Method 31 [April 15, 1992]) or 503.2g 504.2(g)
(SCAQMD Method 313-91 [April 1997]) of this rule.
(a) Plastisols, powder coatings, and radiation-cured coatings shall be cured according to
the procedures actually used in the coating process being tested before final VOC-
emission determinations are made.
(b) In the case of multi-component, polymerizing coatings tested according to 503.1a
Section 504.1(a) of this rule, Method 24 shall be modified to eliminate the post-
mixing dilution-step (that employs toluene or other solvent). Instead, the mixture
shall be spread by appropriate technique to form a thin layer, occupying the entire
bottom of the foil pan. Techniques included in the method referenced in 503.1b
Section 504.1(b) of this rule, can be used as a guide for such spreading.
b. The VOC content of gaseous emissions entering and exiting an ECS shall be determined by
either EPA Method 18 referred to in subsection 503.2b Section 504.2(b) of this rule, or EPA
Method 25 and its submethod, referred to in subsection 503.2d. Section 504.2(d) of this rule.
c. Capture efficiency of an ECS shall be determined either by the methods in 503.2e Section
504.2(e) of this rule (EPA Method 204 and its submethods), or by using mass balance
calculation methods in concert with the methods in 503.2a Section 504.2(a) of this rule (EPA
Methods 2, 2a, 2c, and 2d).
d. Measurement of air pressure at the center of the spray gun tip and air horns of an air-
atomizing spray gun (reference subsection 302.1: Section 225) shall be performed using an

attachable device in proper working order supplied by the gun's manufacturer for performing
such a measurement.
e. Temperature measurements shall be done with an instrument with an accuracy and precision
of less than one-half degree Fahrenheit (0.25°C) for temperatures up to 480°F (250°C).
503.2 Compliance Determination-Test Methods Adopted Incorporated by Reference: The following
test methods are approved for use for the purpose of determining compliance with this rule. The
test methods The EPA test methods as they exist in the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) (July
1, 1998), as listed below, are adopted are incorporated by reference in Appendix G of the
Maricopa County Air Pollution Control Regulations. The other test methods listed here are also
adopted by reference, each having paired with it a specific date that identifies the particular
version/revision of the method that is adopted by reference. These adoptions by reference include
no future editions or amendments. Copies of test methods referenced in this Section 503 are
available at the Maricopa County Air Quality Department, 1001 N. Central Ave., Phoenix, AZ,
85004. Alternative test methods as approved by the Administrator or other EPA-approved test
methods may be used upon prior written approval from the Control Officer. When more than one
test method is permitted for the same determination, an exceedance under any method will
constitute a violation. Copies of test methods referenced in this section are available at the
Maricopa County Air Quality Department, 1001 N. Central Avenue, Suite 125, Phoenix, AZ
85004-1942.
a. EPA Methods 2 (“Determination of Stack Gas Velocity and Volumetric Flow Rate”), 2a
(“Direct Measurement of Gas Volume Through Pipes and Small Ducts”), 2c (“Determination
of Stack Gas Velocity and Volumetric Flow rate in Small Stacks or Ducts”), and 2d
(“Measurement of Gas volumetric Flow Rates in Small Pipes and Ducts”). All 4 of the
foregoing methods are in 40 CFR 60, Appendix A.
b. EPA Method 18 (“Measurement of Gaseous Organic Compound Emissions by Gas
Chromatography”) and its submethods (40 CFR 60, Appendix A).
c. EPA Test Method 24 (“Determination of Volatile Matter Content, Water Content, Density,
Volume Solids, and Weight Solids of Surface Coatings”) (40 CFR 60, Appendix A).
d. EPA Method 25 (“Determination of Total Gaseous Non-methane Organic Emissions as
Carbon”) and its submethods (40 CFR 60, Appendix A).
e. EPA Test Methods 204 (“Criteria for and Verification of a Permanent or Temporary Total
Enclosure”), 204a, 204b, 204c, 204d, 204e, and 204f (Appendix M, 40 CFR 51).
f. California’s Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD) Method 31 (April 15,
1992), “Determination of Volatile Organic Compounds in Paint Strippers, Solvent Cleaners,
and Low Solids Coatings.”
g. California’s South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) Method 313-91 (April
1997).
503.3 Test Methods for ECS: For coatings/adhesives controlled pursuant to subsection 302.1 or
subsection Section 305.3 305 of this rule:
a. Measurements of VOC emissions from an ECS shall be conducted in accordance with EPA
Methods 18 or its submethods, or by Method 25 or its submethods (40 CFR 60, Appendix A).
b. Capture efficiency of an ECS shall be determined by mass balance in combination with
ventilation/draft rate determinations done in accordance with subsection 503.3(c) Section
504.3(c) of this rule or with US EPA Test Methods 204, 204a, 204b, 204c, 204d, 204e, and
204f (Appendix M, 40 CFR 51).
c. Ventilation/draft rates shall be determined by EPA Methods 2, 2a, 2c, and 2d (40 CFR 60,
Appendix A).
504 FORMULA FOR TOTAL VOC VAPOR PRESSURE: Equivalent to: VOC COMPOSITE PARTIAL
PRESSURE. Reference subsection 303.2

n
∑ ( W )( VP ) MW
i i i
PP = i = 1
c W m W ej n W
w + ∑ + ∑ i
18 i = 1 MW ej i = 1 MW i
Wi = Weight of the “i”th VOC compound in grams
Ww = Weight of water in grams
Wej = Weight of the “j”th non-precursor compound in grams
MWi = Molecular weight of the “i”th VOC compound in grams per gram mole, e.g., one
gram-mole of isopropyl alcohol weighs 60 grams
MWej = Molecular weight of the “j”th non-precursor compound, e.g., 1 gram-mole of
acetone weighs 58 grams
PPc = VOC composite partial pressure at 20°C in mm mercury (Hg)
VPi = Vapor pressure of the “i”th VOC compound at 20°C in mm Hg
18 = Weight of one gram-mole of water

Return to list of attachments
MARICOPA COUNTY BOARD OF HEALTH MEETING MINUTES
Monday, April 25, 2016
301 W. Jefferson Street, 10th Floor
Phoenix, Arizona 85003
Board of Supervisors Conference Room
President Kip Steill called the meeting to order at 3:09 p.m.
ROLL CALL:
Members Present: Members Excused:
Don Cassano Scott Somers
Nedra Halley Francisca Montoya
Andrew Kunasek
Debra Baldauff
Kip Steill
Don Hughes
Robert MacMillan
Michael Mills, M.D. (via phone)
Ex-Officio: Bob England, M.D.
CALL TO THE PUBLIC:
Mr. Kip Steill announced it was time for a call to the public and requested public comment forms
for those who wanted to speak or who wanted to address any action items.
Supervisor Kunasek introduced the newest Board of Health member, Mr. MacMillan.
DISCUSSION/ACTION ITEMS
1. Election of Board of Health Vice President:
Mr. Don Hughes was nominated as Vice President of the Board of Health. A motion was made by
Mr. Don Cassano and seconded by Ms. Nedra Halley and all were in favor. The motion passed
unanimously.
2. Approval of Minutes: President Steill asked for a motion to approve the minutes from the BOH
Meeting held on January 25, 2016. Motion was made by Ms. Nedra Halley to approve the BOH
minutes as presented. Motion was seconded by Mr. Don Cassano and the motion passed
unanimously.
3. Approval of Public Health FY 17 OMB Budget Recommendation Mr. Scot Pitcairn
The Board of Health Finance Committee recommended that the Board of Health approve Public
Health’s FY 17 OMB Budget Recommendation. Mr. Pitcairn was available to answer any questions
that the Board of Health had. Motion was made by Mr. Don Hughes to approve Public Health’s FY
17 OMB budget recommendation. Motion was seconded by Mr. Don Cassano and the motion
passed unanimously.
4. Approval of Environmental Services FY 17 OMB Budget Recommendation Ms. Diane Cabanillas
The Board of Health Finance Committee recommended that the Board of Health approve
Environmental Services’ FY 17 OMB Budget Recommendation. Ms. Cabanillas was available to
answer any questions that the Board of Health had. Motion was made by Mr. Don Hughes to
1

approve Environmental Services FY 17 OMB budget recommendation. Motion was seconded by Mr.
Halley and the motion passed unanimously.
5. Approval of the initiation of regulatory change for the ozone-related Mr. Philip A. McNeely
rulemakings
The rules being revised regarding ozone are the following:
Rule 241: Minor New Source Review
Rule 322: Power Plant Operations
Rule 323: Fuel Burning Equipment from Industrial/Commercial/Institutional Sources
Rule 324: Stationary Internal Combustion (IC) Engines
Rule 336: Surface Coating Operations
Rule 342: Coating Wood Furniture and Fixtures
Rule 350: Storage of Organic Liquids at Bulk Plants and Terminals
Rule 351: Loading of Organic Liquids
Rule 352: Gasoline Delivery Vessel Testing and Use
Rule 353: Gasoline In Stationary Dispensing Tanks
These rules are being closed for public comment and will be published May 13th. If there is no
further comment, the rules will go to the Board of Supervisors for a hearing. These rules are in
regards to non-attainment for the ozone standards. These rules are due to the EPA January 1, 2017
and have gone through the EROP/stakeholder meeting process. Every facility that has a permit will
receive information when rule changes are occurring via email. For more information on the
regulatory process: http://www.maricopa.gov/regulations/default.aspx
Motion was made by Mr. Don Cassano to approve the initiation of regulatory change for the
ozone-related rulemakings. Motion was seconded by Ms. Nedra Halley and the motion passed
unanimously.
6. Fee Waiver Applications Mr. Ken Conklin
Mr. Ken Conklin presented thirty-two (32) fee waivers for review and consideration of approval. A
summary sheet document was provided.
Motion to approve the 32 Fee Waiver applications was made by Ms. Nedra Halley, seconded by
Mr. Don Cassano and all were in favor. Motion passed unanimously.
Discussion Items:
1. Public Health Report: Dr. Bob England
i. Human Resources
ii. Communication
iii. Infrastructure
iv. Strategic Planning
v. Programs
vi. Disease Update
vii. Future Topics
Dr. Bob provided the Board of Health with the updated Public Health org chart. The re-org has
aligned MCDPH into programmatic divisions. Previously, MCDPH was organized by funding stream.
Dr. Bob briefed the board on funding cuts that the department is receiving, including a $300,000
cut to WIC and $230,000 cut to the Office of Preparedness and Response (CDC is pulling some
money back for the Zika response). WIC is struggling to meet a target number of clients but each
time the program doesn’t meet the target, the number of target clients and funding is decreased.
The reason for difficulties with reaching the target number of client is that client encounter has
2

become increasingly more complex. The Office of Vital Records is moving their St. Mary’s Food
Bank location to a location near the 1-17 and Dunlap. MCDPH is no longer tracking returning
travelers from ebola stricken countries. Arizona has experienced the highest level of severity in the
country for flu for hospitalization and death rates. CDC is gathering data but there may not be
enough lab evidence to determine a cause. Zika virus is another of the flaviviruses that is associated
with significant neurological defects in infants whose mothers were infected with the virus in the
first two trimesters of pregnancy. The primary vector is Aedes Aegypti mosquitos. In Maricopa
County, there is no endemic spread of zika; only one travel associated case. The strategy when
there is a travel associated case is to have the individual stay inside, wear repellant, and when
necessary, have Environmental Services do traps and remediation depending on consent. There is
concern regarding the process and timeline it would take to enter private property if necessary to
spray for this type of mosquito. The Surgeon General will be visiting Arizona in May to do a tour on
opioid use. The NACCHO Annual meeting will be July 19 – 21 in Phoenix.
ANNOUNCEMENTS AND CURRENT EVENTS
 Next meeting is July 25, 2016
ADJOURNMENT: There being no further business, motion to adjourn the meeting was made by Mr.
Don Cassano, seconded by Ms. Halley and motion was passed unanimously. The meeting was
adjourned at 4:27 p.m.
3

Copies of all written and electronic Stakeholder input
Return to list of attachments
5/19/2016
Maricopa County Air Quality Department
1001 N. Central Avenue, Suite 125
Phoenix, Arizona 85004
AQ-2015-005
Rule 336 Surface Coating Operations
30-Day Comment Period
Good Afternoon:
As an Arizona Voluntary Environmental Stewardship Program (VESP) member, PING, Inc. (PING) strives to
meet or exceed applicable environmental regulations. With that goal in mind, we appreciate the
opportunity to submit written comments on Rule 336 during the 30-day comment period.
If you have any questions, please contact me at 602.687.5000
For PING, Inc.
Matt Conway
Director of Environmental Health and Safety

Comments for Rule 336
Submitted by PING Inc.
5/19/16
Section 304.2 Disposal of VOC-Containing Material
The current draft of Rule 336 Section 304.2 states:
An owner or operator shall store all VOC containing materials intended for disposal including, but
not limited to, rags, waste coatings, waste brushes, waste rollers, waste applicators, waste
solvents, and their residues, in closed, leak free containers. The containers shall be clearly marked
“Disposal of VOC Material” and remain covered with a leak tight cover, when not in use.
Marking of waste containers is both a best practice as well as a regulatory requirement. From a
regulatory perspective, waste streams are typically regulated under the Resource Conservation and
Recovery Act (RCRA). Containers storing hazardous waste are required to be labeled “Hazardous Waste”
regardless of their composition. In general, wastes rags and wipers containing VOCs would most likely be
required to be labeled “Hazardous Waste” or possibly “Excluded Solvent Contaminated Wipes” depending
on the regulatory status of the rags/wipers. Furthermore, in many industries regulated by RCRA, the
workforce is required to be trained to appropriately handle waste materials – in this instance, workers
would look for the “Hazardous Waste” label to identify the appropriate container to place VOC-containing
wastes.
The current language in the draft rule requires that containers shall be clearly marked “Disposal of VOC
Material”. While there may be workplaces where waste containers are not RCRA-labeled and the marking
noted in the rule is valuable, for those workplaces that are regulated by RCRA, the marking requirement
noted in the rule adds complexity as now containers will need to be double-labeled. Workplaces will be
required to apply a label to meet Rule 336 and apply another label to meet RCRA requirements.
It would appear that the intent of the marking requirement is to make sure that the contents of the
container are clearly identified.
Given these considerations and in order to provide clarity and flexibility while still meeting the intent of
the requirement, we propose that the language in the rule be modified to state
 the containers shall be clearly marked “Disposal of VOC Material” or as required by other
applicable law and remain covered with a leak tight cover, when not in use.

Michelle Mada - AQDX
Subject: FW: Maricopa County Rule 336
From: Kathleen Sommer - AQDX
Sent: Monday, June 06, 2016 3:13 PM
To: 'MATTC@PING.COM'
Subject: Maricopa County Rule 336
Matt Conway
Director of Environmental Health and Safety
Ping, Inc.
Hello Matt,
We received your comment on Rule 336, Section 304.2 that requires specific labeling of VOC-containing containers.
The Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPR) that was published in the Arizona Administrative Register on May
13, 2016 (http://apps.azsos.gov/public_services/register/2016/20/contnets.pdf) has eliminated the reference to
labeling VOC-containing materials under Work Practices, Section 304.2 and moved the labeling requirement to
Section 304.5 of the rule. In this new Section 304.5, the requirement is changed to generally state: “Containers in
which VOC-containing materials are stored must have a legible label identifying the container’s contents”. The new
section does not require specific text for labeling as you found in an earlier version of draft Rule 336. The specific
RCRA labeling requirement complies with this general requirement so there is no need to double label the containers.
Thank you for helping us draft this rule.
Kathleen Sommer M.P.H.
Senior Planner
Maricopa County Air Quality Department
1001 North Central Avenue, suite 125
Phoenix, Arizona 85004
Located at the Central Ave. & Roosevelt METRO stop
Desk: (602) 506-6706 : CleanAirMakeMore.com
kathleensommer@mail.maricopa.gov
1



Return to list of attachments

Return to list of attachments
Executive Summary
of the Report to the Board of Supervisors
Prepared by the Maricopa County Air Quality Department
Board Hearing Date: November 2, 2016
Case #/Title: AQ-2015-006-Rule 342 (Coating Wood Furniture And Fixtures)
Agenda Item:
Supervisor Districts: All Districts
The Maricopa County Air Quality Department (department) complied with all statutory and county policies
throughout this rulemaking process. Per the Enhanced Regulatory Outreach Program (EROP) Policy: “In addition
to the required staff report, an executive summary of the report including an overview of stakeholder input and
staff responses will be provided to the Board of Supervisors at least one week prior to any Board of Supervisors’
public hearing.”
Overview Of The Report To The Board Of Supervisors:
The department is requesting the Board of Supervisors to approve amendments to Maricopa County Air Pollution
Control Regulations regarding Rule 342 (Coating Wood Furniture and Fixtures) and approve submitting the
amended rule as a revision to the (Arizona) State Implementation Plan (SIP).
The purpose of this rulemaking is to revise the rule to address the requirements of the State Implementation Plan
(SIP) for “moderate” nonattainment for the 2008 eight-hour ozone national ambient air quality standard
(NAAQS). Rule 342 revisions include the addition or clarification of rule language to meet the Control
Techniques Guideline (Control of Volatile Organic Compound Emissions From Wood Furniture Manufacturing
Operations”, April 1996). The proposed amendments in Rule 342 include Reasonably Available Control
Technology (RACT) for volatile organic compounds (VOCs).
Overview Of Stakeholder Input And Staff Responses:
Three Stakeholder Workshops were held: August 3, 2015, December 17, 2015, and February 9, 2016. Workshop
discussions included the applicability of RACT to the current rule, the economic impact a proposed reduction of
VOC limits would have on the industry, the proposed addition of operator training and recordkeeping, the
proposed addition of leak detection and recordkeeping, and alternative gun technologies now available.
A 30-day comment period was held May-June 2016. During the 30-day comment period, the department did not
receive any written comments.
The department discussed the comments (raised during the workshops) with Stakeholders and reached an
equitable consensus regarding how the comments should be addressed. The department addressed all of the
comments; responses have been incorporated into the draft rule and are explained in the Preamble of the Draft
Notice of Final Rulemaking.

Return to list of attachments
Report to the Board of Supervisors
Prepared by the Maricopa County Air Quality Department
Board of Health Meeting Date: April 25, 2016
Board Hearing Date: November 2, 2016
Case #/Title: AQ-2015-006-Rule 342 (Coating Wood Furniture And Fixtures)
Agenda Item:
Supervisor Districts: All Districts
Applicant: Staff
Request: Approve amendments to Maricopa County Air Pollution Control
Regulations regarding Rule 342 (Coating Wood Furniture And Fixtures)
and approve submitting the amended rule as a revision to the (Arizona)
State Implementation Plan (SIP).
The purpose of this rulemaking is to revise the rule to address the
requirements of the SIP for “moderate” nonattainment for the 2008 eight-
hour ozone national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS). The
proposed amendments in Rule 342 include Reasonably Available Control
Technology (RACT) for volatile organic compounds (VOCs).
Support/Opposition: During the 30-day comment period, the department did not receive any
written comments.
Staff
Recommendation: Approve
Board of Health
Recommendation: Approve per Staff recommended language
Additional
Comments: This regulatory change is following the Enhanced Regulatory Outreach
Program (EROP) Policy and workflow process. The County Manager
briefed the Board of Supervisors regarding this rulemaking in May 2015.
Stakeholder workshops were held June 2015 through February 2016. On
April 25, 2016, the Board of Health approved this regulatory change for
the Expedited Process.
Presented By: Philip A. McNeely, R.G., Director
Prepared By: Hether Krause
Attachments: Summary of the proposed regulatory change (See Item 6 of the Draft
Notice of Final Rulemaking)
Analysis of input received during the process and how that input was
responded to (No comments were received; See Item 13 of the Draft
Notice of Final Rulemaking)

Language of proposed regulatory change or amendment (See Item 17 of
the Draft Notice of Final Rulemaking)
Preamble required by Arizona Revised Statutes (A.R.S.) § 49-471.05
(See Draft Notice of Final Rulemaking)
Minutes from Board of Health meeting
Copies of all written and electronic Stakeholder input (No comments
were received)
Signed copy of the Maricopa County Resolution “Moratorium on
Increased Regulatory Burdens”

Return to list of attachments
DRAFT NOTICE OF FINAL RULEMAKING
MARICOPA COUNTY AIR POLLUTION CONTROL REGULATIONS
REGULATION III – CONTROL OF AIR CONTAMINANTS
RULE 342: COATING WOOD FURNITURE AND FIXTURES
PREAMBLE
1. Rule affected: Rulemaking action
Rule 342: Coating Wood Furniture and Fixtures Amend
2. Statutory authority for the rulemaking:
Authorizing statutes: A.R.S. §§ 49-474, 49-479, and 49-480
Implementing Statute: A.R.S. § 49-112
3. The effective date of the rule:
Tentative date of adoption: November 2, 2016
4. List of public notices addressing this rulemaking:
Notice of Briefing to Maricopa County Manager: May 2015
Notice of Stakeholder Workshops: August 3, 2015, December 17, 2015, and February 9, 2016
Notice of Maricopa County Board of Health Meeting: April 25, 2016
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking: 22 A.A.R. 1184, May 13, 2016
5. Name and address of department personnel with whom persons may communicate regarding the
rulemaking:
Name: Hether Krause
Maricopa County Air Quality Department
Planning and Analysis Division
Address: 1001 N Central Avenue, Suite 125
Phoenix, Arizona 85004
Telephone: (602) 506-6010
Fax: (602) 506-6179
E-mail: aqplanning@mail.maricopa.gov Return to list of attachments
6. Explanation of the rule, including the department's reasons for initiating the rulemaking:
Summary:
Rule 342 (Coating Wood Furniture and Fixtures) limits the emission of volatile organic compounds
(VOCs) from the surface preparation and coating of wood furniture and fixtures. The Clean Air Act (CAA)
requires that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the states control VOC emissions
because VOCs react in the presence of sunlight to form ground-level ozone, a major component of “smog”
which is hazardous to human health and the environment. Ozone is largely created by a photochemical
reaction between nitrogen oxides (NOx) and VOCs in the presence of sunlight. NOx and VOCs, called
ozone precursors, create ground-level ozone in urban areas because ozone precursors are emitted from
vehicle exhausts, fuel combustion, and VOC coatings used for various surface coating operations such as
those regulated in Rule 342. The Phoenix area, determined by violations of the National Ambient Air
Quality Standards (NAAQS), has been reclassified from “marginal” to “moderate” nonattainment for the
2008 eight-hour ozone NAAQS. (86 FR 26697, May 4, 2016). Revisions to Rule 342 address the

requirements of the State Implementation Plan (SIP) for “moderate” nonattainment for the 2008 eight-hour
ozone NAAQS. Rule 342 revisions include Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT) for VOCs.
The Maricopa County Air Quality Department (department):
 Added or clarified text in order to meet the Control Techniques Guideline (CTG) for this rule –
“Control of Volatile Organic Compound Emissions from Wood Furniture Manufacturing Operations”,
April 1996
 Moved the exemptions from Section 307 to Section 103
 Deleted “red” and “green” gun tagging requirements
 Added or revised definitions in Section 200
 Revised Section 300 to clarify of the use of spray guns and the handling and disposal of VOC-
containing materials
 Redesigned the table in Section 301 for easier reading
 Added VOC leak detection and repair requirements in Sections 300 and 500 to meet CTG and RACT
requirements
 Revised the compliance schedule in Section 400
 Added annual operator training requirements to Section 400
 Revised the finishing material list in Section 500
 Added recordkeeping requirements for monthly VOC leak detection inspection and repair and annual
operator training in Section 500
In addition, the amendments corrected typographical or other clerical errors; made minor grammatical
changes to improve readability or clarity; modified the format, numbering, order, capitalization,
punctuation, or syntax of certain text to increase standardization within and among rules; or made various
other minor changes of a purely editorial nature. As these changes did not alter the sense, meaning, or
effect of the rules, they are not described in detail here, but can be readily discerned in the “underline/
strikeout” version of the rules contained in Item 17 of this notice.
Background:
The Clean Air Act Amendments (CAAA) of 1990 required ozone nonattainment areas to implement
reasonably available control technology (RACT) to control volatile organic compound (VOC) emissions.
This RACT determination for the associated industry was to be incorporated into the state implementation
plan (SIP). RACT is defined by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) as “The lowest
emission limitation that a particular source is capable of meeting by the application of control technology
that is reasonably available considering technological and economic feasibility.” (44 FR53761, September
17, 1979) To assist state and local agencies in determining RACT, the EPA issues Control Techniques
Guidelines (CTG) for specific sources. The CTG describes the “presumptive norm” for RACT and includes
a review of current knowledge, technology and costs of a variety of emission control techniques. These
guidelines provide state and local environmental agencies a guide in establishing reasonably available
control technology (RACT) regulations for local wood furniture finishing operations. The state or local
agency can then use the presumptive norm for RACT or develop more stringent measures to meet the
established ozone standards.
In 1989, the EPA began the process of establishing the CTG presumptive norm for the wood furniture
industry. Drafts of a CTG were presented in November 1991 to the National Air Pollution Control
Techniques Advisory Committee (NAPCTAC) without a RACT determination for the wood furniture
industry.
The wood furniture industry started to develop its own report in early 1991. This report evaluated a variety
of emission control technologies for their technical feasibility and associated cost. The report also included
“an extensive analysis of the economic impacts of the control technologies…”1 (page 1-3). The industry
report did not include any RACT recommendations.

During this same time, the EPA began work on a national emission standard for hazardous air pollutants
(NESHAP) for the wood furniture industry. The NESHAP establishes limits for hazardous air pollutants
(HAPs). Because the CTG document was further along in the development than the NESHAP, industry was
concerned they would be required to install control technologies to meet the CTG then later when the
NESHAP was promulgated, have to invest again in different technologies. To address this issue, the EPA
and industry agreed establish a committee and develop both the CTG and NESHAP through regulatory
negotiation (58 FR 34011, June 23, 1993). In November 1994, the committee reached consensus on the
CTG and NESHAP framework and principles. The EPA issued the CTG for the wood finishing industry on
May 20, 1996 (60 FR 25223).
The department began the rulemaking process for new Rule 342 (Coating Wood Furniture and Fixtures)
during the same time period as the EPA was developing the CTG. Rule 342 was proposed to apply “…to
any facility applying finishing material to furniture or fixtures made of wood or wood-derived material.”2
The rulemaking included VOC limits for the maximum concentration of VOC for various sealers and
topcoats; emission control system (ECS) requirements; requirements for the use of various types of spray
guns; and compliance options for small sources. On February 15, 1995, the department submitted Rule 342
to the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors (Board) for adoption. Stakeholders raised objection to the
proposed rule because the option of meeting VOC limits through the use of averaging had been omitted
from the proposed rule. The EPA was still in the process of drafting the CTG so no final determination had
been made at the federal level concerning the averaging provision of the CTG. The department stated that
the averaging provisions had been withdrawn from the draft rule because the department could not, at that
time, demonstrate that the averaging provisions would meet the proposed VOC limits. The Board voted to
continue Rule 342 to allow the department and Stakeholders to reach an agreement on the inclusion of the
averaging provisions.3
The department and Stakeholders worked together to revise the draft Rule 342. On April 3, 1996, the Board
again conducted a public hearing on the revised draft Rule 342. There were no objections to the proposed
rule and the Board unanimously approved Rule 342, effective April 3, 1996.4
Additional alternative provisions were proposed to Rule 342. These included the proposed additions of
separate appendices for small emitters of VOC and ECS requirements. Additional proposed revisions
included an optional allowance of up to five percent (5%) of total coating to be applied by a conventional
spray gun; recordkeeping formatting; clarification and addition of definitions; and use of colored tags on
guns used to apply a higher VOC coating material.5 The Board unanimously approved the additional
proposed revisions for Rule 342 on November 20, 1996.6 At this time, the department determined that Rule
342 met the CTG RACT standards for a “marginal” nonattainment area classification.
Rule 342 remained unchanged until 2013 when the department opened the rule for a “limited scope”
rulemaking. This limited scope revision provided the means for the department to streamline the approval
of updates to the EPA definition of VOC to provide a consistent definition of VOC and “non-precursor
organic compounds” throughout the rules. In addition, the 2013 rule revision now allows businesses to use
a wider range of materials, thus leveling the playing field for companies within Maricopa County with
those operating in other jurisdictions.7
The County failed to meet the EPA deadline of July 20, 2015 for the 2008 8-hour ozone standard in order
to maintain the marginal area attainment status. Anticipating a reclassification to moderate nonattainment
status, the department reviewed and revised Rule 342 to meet the CTG RACT. The department determined
that Rule 342 partially met RACT for a moderate nonattainment area with the current VOC emission limits
in the various wood coating processes. The department identified two requirements in the CTG that were
not included in the Rule 342: operator training requirements and VOC leak detection and repair.
Recordkeeping requirements were also required for each additional requirement. The department
determined that these requirements should be included as RACT for the moderate nonattainment
classification. The rule revisions added operator training requirements, VOC leak detection inspections,
VOC leak detection repair, and recordkeeping requirements. The department has determined that the
previous and current revisions to Rule 342 now meet RACT requirements for Maricopa County.
As of October 2015, there were eight-two (82) permits issued by Maricopa County Air Quality that include
Rule 342 requirements8. Three permits are Title V sources, but not necessarily Title V for VOC emissions
from wood finishing only. Fifteen (15) permits are general woodworking permits. The remaining permits

are Non-Title V permits. Some Non-Title V permitted facilities may be “synthetic minors” meaning the
facility has accepted an emission limit below the Title V threshold. The Non-Title V permittees may or
may not be permitted with the primary process being wood finishing.
Previous to this rulemaking, a Stakeholder inquired if Rule 342 applied to businesses primarily engaged in
other activities in addition to the manufacturing of furniture or the repair and reconditioning of furniture. In
a technical guidance issued by the department (TG#98-007) on October 1, 1998, the department concluded,
at that time, that if the business was primarily engaged in other activities and the manufacturer of furniture
that Rule 342 did apply. If the business was engaged in other activities than furniture manufacturing and
only reconditioned or repaired furniture, then they would not be subject to Rule 342. In this rulemaking, the
department further clarified the applicability of Rule 342. Section 103 (Exemptions) was added to include
total exemptions and partial exemptions addressing the reconditioning or repair of furniture. The
department rescinded #TG98-007 (October 1, 1998) with this rule revision.
Issues Raised and Discussed During this Rulemaking Process:
The department held three Stakeholder workshops: August 3, 2015, December 17, 2015, and February 9,
2016. Stakeholders included representatives from AF Lorts Company, AG Layne, American Coatings
Association, Andrews Environmental Management, LLC, Copperstate Cabinet, Crown Custom Millwork,
Geosyntec Consultants, Legends Furniture Company, Oak Canyon Manufacturing, Inc, Oakcraft, Inc, Ping,
RPM Wood Finishes Group, Ryley Carlock and Applewhite Law Firm, SATA GmbH & Co. KG, The
Sherwin-Williams Company, SWCA Environmental Consultants, Trendwood, Woodcase Fine Cabinetry,
Inc, Wurth Louis, and the EPA.
Workshop discussions included the applicability of RACT to the current rule; the economic impact a
reduction of VOC limits would have on the industry; the addition of operator training and recordkeeping
requirements; the addition of leak detection and recordkeeping requirements; and alternative gun
technologies now available.
RACT Issues Raised and Discussed
VOC EMISSION LIMITS
The department originally proposed to reduce the VOC emission limits for all coating types. Stakeholders
said that the proposed reduction in the VOC limits goes beyond the established RACT requirements. The
American Coatings Association responded:
The current [original department proposed VOC limit] 275 g/l VOC industrial wood coating
formulation technology that was developed for use in southern California for industrial
customers could not be applied in the even hotter and dryer climate in Arizona. The majority
of manufacturers and shops do not have air conditioning or operate in temperature and
humidity controlled environments. Solventborne 275 g/l coatings rely on acetone that
volatilize too quickly in the hot and dry environment of AZ and therefore does not spray well
and produces an aesthetically unacceptable finish. Reformulating with other exempt
compounds will increase the cost of the coatings, since these cost more than acetone. In
addition, waterborne coatings that meet the 275 g/l limits have similar aesthetic issues.
Also due to the Maricopa County's hot desert climate, we suggest that there are application
difficulties with the [department proposed] 120 g/L (material) VOC Low-Solids Stain and
Low-Solids Toner and Washcoat. Traditional High Solids Stain at <350 g/L VOC has not
emerged as an acceptable alternative in other jurisdictions because the time required for
curing before application of sealer and/or topcoat is generally considered excessive.9
Stakeholders requested that the department conduct more research to determine the VOC limits that would
meet current RACT. The Stakeholders also requested documentation of the emissions inventory for the
wood finishing industry in Maricopa County and how much emission reduction is hoped to be achieved
with the proposed VOC limits. The original proposed VOC limits were from air agencies located in areas
designated as serious nonattainment for ozone. The department reviewed other rules of air agencies that are
located in moderate ozone nonattainment areas. The department determined the proposed VOC emission
limits were too stringent for a moderate nonattainment area. Table 342-2 retained the current VOC

emission limits and clarified the VOC emission limits for specific types of coatings. Other revisions to
Table 342-2 included the addition of strippable booth coating, and low VOC topcoat VOC limits.
VOC LEAK DETECTION AND REPAIR
Section 304 and Section 501.4 were added to include VOC Leak Detection and Repair standards. The
department referred to the CTG to determine the requirements for leak detection and repair. CTG Section
5.3.1.2 VOC Transfer1 (pg 5-7) describes the leak inspection program. The minimum criteria identified in
the CTG included a monthly inspection frequency; procedures for addressing leaking equipment; and a
maximum time frame for completing repairs unless replacement equipment has been ordered. The
department worked with the Stakeholders to draft Section 304 of the rule to include leak inspections for
“equipment used to transfer or apply VOC-containing finishing materials.” In addition, monthly leak
inspection is now required. Leak repair specifies the first attempt to repair is to be made within five days of
detection with final repairs completed within fifteen days. Additional items were added in the final repair
section. Options to meet the final repair time frame also include the option of removing the leaking
equipment from service and an option of replacing the leaking equipment with a new purchase within three
months of leak detection. Section 501.4 identifies the information that is required to document VOC leak
detection and any required repairs. Stakeholders requested that the rule list out the specific information
required for the inspection records. The department added a list to clarify the VOC leak detection and
repair requirements for the owner or operator as well as for inspection purposes.
EMPLOYEE TRAINING REQUIREMENTS
Section 403 (Annual Operator Training Requirements to Reduce VOC Emissions) includes training
requirements for employees. CTG Section 5.3.3 General Work Practice Requirements1 (pg 5-14) outlines
the minimum requirements for a training program. The CTG recommends annual training that includes
coating application, cleaning and washoff techniques, proper equipment operation, methods to reduce
solvent usage, and proper management of VOC waste materials. Stakeholders requested this section be
clearly identified to be applicable to VOC-containing materials only. Stakeholders were concerned facility
operations that did not involve VOC-containing materials may be noted as being in non-compliance during
an inspection. The department revised the section title to be specific to VOC emissions. In addition, the
department included specific training as recommended in the CTG. The department is allowing up to six
months after the rule adoption for facilities to come into compliance with the rule revisions. The
department added Section 501.5 (Annual Operator Training Records Required by Section 403 of this Rule)
to list out the specific requirements for the training recordkeeping. The list clarified the employee training
requirements for the owner or operator as well as for inspection purposes.
Section 100 Issues Raised and Discussed
Section 100, Table 342-1 (Applicable Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) Codes) was added as a
convenience to the reader. Stakeholders and department staff agreed that the addition of the table with the
SIC title will make it easier to identify the type of woodworking to which the rule applies. Since the
definition of WOOD FURNITURE AND FIXTURES in Section 236 of the rule lists the SIC numbers to
identify what constitutes wood furniture and fixtures and therefore as to what Rule 342 applies, the
department included such SIC in the Applicability section of the rule. Although SIC codes have been
updated to North American Industry Classification System (NAICS), the department did not include
NAICS in Rule 342. Rule 342 was revised to be consistent with the CTG; the CTG uses SIC codes as the
means by which to determine applicability; therefore, the department did not include NAICS in Rule 342.
The department added Section 103 (Exemptions) and deleted Section 307 from the current rule. The
exemptions described in current Rule 342, Section 307 were difficult to locate within the rule. Stakeholders
and department staff agreed that moving the exemptions to the beginning of the rule will make it easier to
identify rule applicability to a facility. In addition, Stakeholders requested that the department clarify in the
exemption section that sources subject to Rule 342 are exempt from other Maricopa County Air Pollution
Control Regulations. The department added Section 103.1(c) to address this concern.
Section 200 Issues Raised and Discussed
The previous rule definition of CERTIFIED PRODUCT DATA SHEET (CPDS) required that “…an
officer of a coating supplying operation…” sign the CPDS. Stakeholders stated that the suppliers do not

sign the CPDS that accompany the VOC-containing materials creating a situation where the facility cannot
comply with the rule as written. The CPDS definition was taken from the definitions in the CTG Model
Rule language. In the years since the CTG was issued, manufacturers and suppliers have included the VOC
content information on labels and on product information supplied to the facilities. The American Coatings
Association supported the suggestion to remove the signature requirement for the CPDS. Further discussion
asked if the definition was even needed in the rule. Since the only reference to a CPDS was in Appendix A
to Rule 342, the Stakeholders and the department deleted the definition from Section 200 and added the
definition of “CPDS” to Appendix A to Rule 342.
The definition of a HIGH-VOLUME, LOW PRESSURE SPRAY GUN (HVLP) was added. At the time the
CTG was written, the “disadvantage of HVLP systems in general is that the HVLP systems are reportedly
not always able to apply finishes as quickly as the other spray techniques.”1 (pg. 2-25) Since the HVLP
spray gun operated at a 10 psi, a psi at or below a low pressure spray gun, it was assumed that by defining
LOW PRESSURE SPRAY GUN, an HVLP gun would be included in the definition. Since the issuance of
the CTG, manufacturers have continued to refine the HVLP spray gun. It is now the most common type of
spray gun in use and considered the industry standard in which to measure spray gun efficiency against.
The inclusion of the definition of HVLP spray gun provides language consistent with current industry and
manufacturing terms. In addition to the addition of the definition of HVLP, Stakeholders requested
referencing HVLP spray guns whenever low pressure spray guns were specified in the rule. The department
added the definition of HVLP spray gun, retained the definition of LOW PRESSURE SPRAY GUN, and
included references to HVLP spray guns where appropriate in the rule.
Stakeholders requested that the definition of WORKING DAY be revised to limit the definition to when
VOC-containing material is used. Stakeholders stated that there are times when “manufacturing” is taking
place, but no VOC-containing materials are being used. Examples of these types of “manufacturing”
operations include the prep work, such as cutting and sanding, of wood materials. Revising the definition to
include just the operations involving VOC-containing material would follow the rule’s intent and
applicability as stated in Section 100 of the rule. Since the rule does not cover the emissions of particulate
matter and does limit the emissions to VOC emissions, the department revised the definition of WORKING
DAY to a day or days when “…the application of VOC-containing finishing material [is applied] to wood
furniture or fixtures.”
Section 300 Issues Raised and Discussed
The department originally proposed to reduce the VOC emission limits for all coating types. After further
review (refer to “RACT Issues Raised and Discussed” section above) the current VOC emission limits are
retained. Table 342-2 was revised to clarify the emission limits for specific types of coatings and includes
the VOC limits for strippable booth coating and low VOC topcoats.
Section 304 was revised to add requirements for VOC Leak Detection and Repair standards. Refer to
“RACT Issues Raised and Discussed” section above for a detailed discussion.
Section 305 was renumbered to Section 306 and to specify that the section is applicable to the handling and
disposal of VOC-containing materials. Stakeholders expressed concerns that non-VOC-containing
materials may be noted as being in non-compliance during an inspection. There was concern that Section
305.1 (Use and Storage) was unclear as to when a material is considered “in use”. The department
considered this issue and revised the provision in Rule 342, Section 306 to specify that storage containers
for VOC-containing materials must be covered when not in use.
Section 306 included requirements for manufacturers of wood furniture coatings and not to stationary
sources. The department has authority (under Arizona Revised Statutes) to regulate stationary sources of air
pollution, not manufacturers of coatings. Therefore Section 306 was deleted in its entirety.
Section 307 was deleted in its entirety. The exemptions are now included in Section 103 of the Rule 342.
Refer to the detailed discussion in above “Section 100 Issues Raised and Discussed”.
Section 400 Issues Raised and Discussed
Section 401.2 was revised to delete the past compliance dates. The requirement stated in Section 401.2(b) is
now incorporated into the main paragraph in Section 401.2. Section 401.2(a) was deleted since the
compliance date has passed.

Section 403 (Gun Tagging Requirements) is deleted. Gun tagging requirements are no longer needed.
Section 403 (Annual Operator Training Requirements to Reduce VOC Emissions) includes training
requirements for employees. Section 5.3.3 “General Work Practice Requirements” of the CTG1 (pg 5-14)
outlines the minimum requirements for a training program. Refer to “RACT Issues Raised and Discussed”
section above for a detailed discussion. The department added specific training requirements as
recommended in the CTG and is allowing up to six months after rule adoption for facilities to come into
compliance with the training requirements as stated in the rule revisions.
Section 500 Issues Raised and Discussed
Section 501.1 was revised to specify that a current list of all VOC-containing material be updated by the
end of the following month. Section 501.1(b) (How to Express VOC Content) and Section 501.1(c)
(Acceptable Format) are deleted. Section 501.1(d) (Mix Ratios) is retained, re-numbered, and clarified; a
current list of VOC-containing mix ratios for catalyst/hardeners shall be maintained if the manufacturer's
recommended mix ratio is not followed or when the manufacturer has no recommendations.
Section 501.4 (Monthly VOC Leak Detection Inspection and Repair Records) identifies the information
that is now required to document VOC leak detection and any required repairs. Stakeholders requested that
the rule list out the specific information that is required for the inspection records. This list will make it
clear for the owner or operator as well as for inspection purposes. Refer to “RACT Issues Raised and
Discussed” section above for a detailed discussion.
The department added Section 501.5 (Annual Operator Training Records Required by Section 403 of this
Rule) to list out the specific requirements for the training recordkeeping. This list will make it clear for the
owner or operator as well as for inspection purposes.
Appendix A(d)(1) definitions were revised to include the definition of CERTIFIED PRODUCT DATA
SHEET (CPDS). Stakeholders questioned if the definition of a CPDS was even needed in the rule.
Appendix A to Rule 342 does reference the certified product data sheet. The Stakeholders and department
agreed to delete the definition from Section 200 and added CERTIFIED PRODUCT DATA SHEET to the
definitions in Appendix A to Rule 342.
The department added Table 342-3 (Formula 2 Neutral Point VOC Content of Coating) in Appendix
A(d)(6). The department felt a table would be easier to read to determine the neutral point for the various
coatings; the department did not change the VOC limits.
The Green Tag requirements in Appendix B(d)(2) are deleted for consistency throughout the rule. The
heading for Appendix B(e)(1) (Housekeeping Functions) was revised. Stakeholders requested that “Keep
Coatings…” be changed to “Keep VOC-Containing Materials…”, so the header will read “Keep VOC-
Containing Materials, Cleaners, & Waste-Materials Covered”.
The department clarified Appendix C to Rule 342(d) regarding the compliance schedule for Emission
Control Systems (ECS). The section addresses all emissions that are vented to an ECS and does not apply
to millwork.
Description of Amendments:
The department revised the following throughout the rule:
 Renumbered the sections to reflect additions or deletions
 Changed “subsection” to “section”
 Deleted “no person” and inserted “an owner or operator”
 Added references throughout the rule to HVLP spray guns where ever requirements for low-
pressure spray guns are cited
 Deleted the duplicate Section 307.2(e) and Errata Note 1
 Added the title of test methods
 Deleted the past compliance dates

 Included English measurements followed by metric measurements in parenthesis
 Deleted references to “red” and “green” tags for spray guns
Revisions to Section 100:
 Added Table 342-1 (Applicable Standard Industrial Classification Codes)
 Added Section 103 (Exemptions)
Revisions to Section 200:
 Deleted the definition of CERTIFIED PRODUCT DATA SHEET
 Added the definition of HIGH-VOLUME, LOW PRESSURE SPRAY GUN (HVLP)
 Revised the definition of KILOGRAMS VOC PER KILOGRAM OF COATING SOLIDS
 Revised the definition of VOC SOLVENT
 Revised the definition of WORKING DAY
Revisions to Section 300:
 Revised the table in Section 301.1
 Revised the wording in Section 301.1 and delete 301.1(a) and (b)
 Deleted section 301.1(c)
 Revised the wording in Section 302.1
 Added Section 304 (VOC Leak Detection and Repair)
 Added the wording in Section 305
 Deleted Section 307
Revisions to Section 400:
 Deleted past compliance dates in Section 401
 Revised the wording in Section 401.2
 Revised Section 403 (Gun Tagging Requirements)
 Added Section 403 (Annual Operator Training Requirements to Reduce VOC Emissions)
Revisions to Section 500:
 Revised Section 501.1(b) (List Maximum VOC Content of Finishing Material as Applied)
 Deleted Section 501.1(b) (How to Express VOC Content)
 Deleted Section 501.1(c) (Acceptable Format)
 Deleted Section 501.1(d) (Mix Ratio)
 Added Section 501.4 (Monthly VOC Leak Detection Inspection and Repair Records)
 Added Section 501.5 (Annual Operator Training Records Required by Section 403 of this Rule)
 Revised Section 502 (Compliance Determination-Test Methods)
Revisions to Appendix A:
 Added the definition of CERTIFIED PRODUCT DATA SHEET to Appendix A(d)(1)
 Added Table 342-3 (Formula 2 Neutral Point VOC Content of Coating) in Section d(6)
Revisions to Appendix B:

 Revised the text in Section B(e)(1) (Housekeeping Functions) to match the text in Sections 306.1
(Handling and Disposal of VOC-Containing Materials-Use and Storage) and 306.2 (Handling and
Disposal of VOC-Containing Materials-Disposal of VOC and VOC-Containing Material)
 Revised the text in Section B(e)(2) (Housekeeping Functions) to match the text in Section 305.1
(Cleanup and Cleaning Supply and Application Equipment-Booth Cleaning)
 Revised the title of Section d(2) (Conventional Spray Gun Restriction)
 Deleted Section d(2)(a) (Green Tag Requirements)
Revisions to Appendix C:
 Clarified (d) regarding the compliance schedule for Emission Control Systems (ECS). The section
addresses all emissions that are vented to an ECS and does not apply to millwork.
References Cited:
1. “Control of Volatile Organic Compound Emissions from Wood Furniture Manufacturing
Operations”, EPA-453/R-96-007, April 1996.
2. Arizona Administrative Register, 1 A.A.R. 100, February 17, 1995.
3. Maricopa County Clerk of the Board Certified Minutes, February 15, 1995.
4. Maricopa County Clerk of the Board Certified Minutes, April 03, 1996.
5. Arizona Administrative Register, 2 A.A.R. 4305, October 18, 1996.
6. Maricopa County Clerk of the Board Certified Minutes, November 20, 1996.
7. Arizona Administrative Register, 19 A.A.R. 3611, November 22, 2013.
8. Department email between Cheri Dale, Doug Kober and Philip McNeely, October 27, 2015.
9. Department email from David Darling, American Coatings Association, September 01, 2015.
7. Demonstration of compliance with A.R.S. §49-112:
Under A.R.S. § 49-479(C), a county may not adopt a rule or ordinance that is more stringent than the rules
adopted by the Director of the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ) for similar sources
unless it demonstrates compliance with the applicable requirements of A.R.S. §49-112.
§ 49-112 County regulation; standards
§ 49-112(A)
When authorized by law, a county may adopt a rule, ordinance or other regulation that is more stringent
than or in addition to a provision of this title or rule adopted by the director or any Board or commission
authorized to adopt rules pursuant to this title if all of the following conditions are met:
1. The rule, ordinance or other regulation is necessary to address a peculiar local condition.
2. There is credible evidence that the rule, ordinance or other regulation is either;
(a) Necessary to prevent a significant threat to public health or the environment that results from a
peculiar local condition and is technically and economically feasible.
(b) Required under a federal statute or regulation, or authorized pursuant to an intergovernmental
agreement with the federal government to enforce federal statutes or regulations if the county rule,
ordinance or other regulation is equivalent to federal statutes or regulation.
3. Any fee or tax adopted under the rule, ordinance or other regulation will not exceed the reasonable
costs of the county to issue and administer that permit or plan approval program.
§ 49-112(B)
When authorized by law, a county may adopt rules, ordinances or other regulations in lieu of a state
program that are as stringent as a provision of this title or rule adopted by the director or any Board or

commission authorized to adopt rules pursuant to this title if the county demonstrates that the cost of
obtaining permits or other approvals from the county will approximately equal or be less than the fee or
cost of obtaining similar permits or approvals under this title or any rule adopted pursuant to this title. If the
state has not adopted a fee or tax for similar permits or approvals, the county may adopt a fee when
authorized by law in the rule, ordinance or other regulation that does not exceed the reasonable costs of the
county to issue and administer that permit or plan approval program.
The department complies with A.R.S. § 49-112(A) in that Maricopa County fails to meet the National
Ambient Air Quality Standards for both ozone and particulates. The County failed to meet 2008 8-hour
ozone standard by the marginal area attainment date of July 20, 2015. The EPA issued a final rule, effective
June 3, 2016, reclassifying the Maricopa County area to “moderate” (published at 86 FR 26697, May 4,
2016). Further, a portion of the County was classified as a serious ozone nonattainment area under the
previous 1-hour ozone standard requiring the county to continue to maintain the measures and requirements
that allowed the county to attain that standard. Revisions to Rule 342 address the requirements of the State
Implementation Plan (SIP) for “moderate” nonattainment for the 2008 eight-hour ozone national ambient
air quality standard (NAAQS). The amendments in Rule 342 include Reasonably Available Control
Technology (RACT).
The department complies with A.R.S. § 49-112(B) in that the amendments to Rule 342 are not more
stringent than or in addition to a provision of Title 49 or rule adopted by the director or any Board or
commission authorized to adopt rules pursuant to Title 49, address the peculiar local conditions in
Maricopa County, are authorized under A.R.S. Title 49, Chapter 3, Article 3, and are not in lieu of a state
program.
8. Documents or studies referenced and/or reviewed for this rulemaking:
Not applicable
9. Showing of good cause why the rule is necessary to promote a statewide interest if the rule will
diminish a previous grant of authority of a political subdivision:
Not applicable
10. Summary of the economic, small business, and consumer impact:
The following discussion addresses each of the elements required for an economic, small business and
consumer impact statement under A.R.S. § 41-1055. The economic summary is based on the number of
Title V and Non-Title V permits issued by the Maricopa County Air Quality Department.
An identification of the rulemaking.
This rulemaking revised Rule 342 (Coating Wood Furniture and Fixtures).
An identification of the persons who will be directly affected by, bear the costs of or directly benefit
from the rulemaking.
The persons who are directly affected by and bear the costs of this rulemaking will be facilities in Maricopa
County that own or operate a facility in which the surface preparation and coating of wood furniture and
fixtures takes place. The department has issued a Title V permit or Non-Title V permit to 67 facilities
subject to Rule 342.
A cost benefit analysis of the following:
(a) The probable costs and benefits to the implementing agency and other agencies directly affected
by the implementation and enforcement of the rulemaking.
The department anticipates that some of the permitted facilities might incur costs for VOC leak
detection and repair (Sections 300 and 500), annual training requirements (Section 400), and
associated recordkeeping (Section 500). These costs are described in more detail in Section 9(c) below.
Rule 342 revisions included several changes that are highly likely to ease the regulatory burden in
terms of the number of entities regulated under the Rule or the amount of time required to comply with
the Rule:

− Section 103.1 exempts sources subject to Rule 342 from Rule 330 (Volatile Organic Compounds)
and Rule 336 (Surface Coating Compounds);
− Section 306 is deleted; thus removing all coatings manufacturers from being subject to Rule 342;
− Section 403 is deleted; spray gun tagging is no longer required.
It is expected that the department will benefit from the increased clarity of the rule with decreased time
to inspect a facility or prepare a permit. The benefits of the rule revision are anticipated to be a result of
the following:
− The addition and clarification of Rule 342 text in order to meet the Control Techniques Guideline
(CTG) for this rule “Control of Volatile Organic Compound Emissions from Wood Furniture
Manufacturing Operations”, April 1996;
− The addition of exemptions to Section 100 of Rule 342;
− The addition and revision of definitions found in Section 200 of Rule 342;
The revision of Section 300 included the redesign of the table in Section 301 for easier reading;
− Clarification of the use of spray guns;
− Clarification of the requirements for handling and disposal of VOC-containing materials;
Revision of the compliance schedule in Section 400 of Rule 342;
− The addition of annual operator training requirements to Section 400 of Rule 342;
− The revision of the finishing material list in Section 500 of Rule 342;
− The modification of the format, numbering, order, capitalization, punctuation, or syntax of certain
text to increase standardization within and among rules.
(b) The probable costs and benefits to a political subdivision of this state directly affected by the
implementation and enforcement of the rulemaking
The rule revisions do not impose increased monetary or regulatory costs on other state agencies,
political subdivisions of this state, persons, or individuals so regulated.
(c) The probable costs and benefits to businesses directly affected by the rulemaking, including any
anticipated effect on the revenues or payroll expenditures of employers who are subject to the
rulemaking.
The Rule 342 revisions could result in the subject entities incurring costs for training, leak detection,
and recordkeeping. In order not to underestimate the potential impacts of the Rule 342 revisions, a cost
analysis was conducted that included the following assumptions:
− All facilities incur training, leak detection, and recordkeeping costs. That is, for the purpose of not
underestimating the costs with the rule revisions, the department assumed that no permitted
facility had in-house training prior to the Rule 342 revisions.
− Training New Employees. The owner/operator spends 30 minutes developing a training checklist,
two hours in training the new employee during which the owner/operator will use the checklist to
ensure all topics are covered, and spends 5 minutes to place the checklist in the employee’s file
when completed.
− Annual Refresher Training. The owner/operator is assumed to use the checklist to ensure he/she
addresses all parts of the training. Other assumptions made to estimate costs: a single piece of
paper is circulated for employees to sign, documenting that they received the annual training; the
owner/operator takes 5 minutes to file the annotated checklist and sign-in sheet; the annual
refresher training is conducted at the facility; and for a 30-minute refresher training, the estimated
costs include 30 minutes for each employee as well as the owner/operator.

− Leak Inspection Program. For the purpose of estimating costs associated with the Rule 342
revisions, these assumptions were made: The owner/operator spends 60 minutes to list each piece
of equipment and its specific checks and another 15 minutes generating 12 copies (one for each
month) and placing these in a storage folder; and each month, a worker is assumed to spend 45
minutes going through the leak inspection checklist and performing the checks, 15 minutes to
update the records for any repairs/ replacements done during the month, and 5 minutes to file the
copy.
The economic analysis used the 25th percentile, average, and 90th percentile industry wages in
Maricopa County for the new employee, average employee, and owner/operator. To estimate potential
costs to a business, it was assumed that in the first year that rule revisions are in effect, every business
hires a new employee, develops training for new and existing employees, conducts the training,
develops the leak inspection program, conducts 12 monthly inspections, and incurs the recordkeeping
costs for training and leak detection. Costs differ by business depending on the number of employees
that receive the annual training. First-year costs are used in the economic analysis. Subsequent years
will not require the development costs for the training and leak inspection program.
Table 1 illustrates the cost estimation calculations for a business with 10 employees in the first year of
the proposed rule revisions. In this case, the cost is about $315 for a facility that has no training of new
hires, no annual refresher training for all employees, and no leak detection program.
Table 1. Training, Leak Inspection, and Recordkeeping Costs—Example First-Year Costs
Cost Element Estimated Cost
New Hire Training $63.77
Leak Detection-Checklist Development $22.48
Leak Detection-Inspection and Recordkeeping $155.22
Annual Refresher Training--Trainer $13.49
Per-Employee Cost $5.97
Number of Employees 10
Refresher Training Costs $59.70
Costs in Impact Analysis $314.66
A leak inspection program and employee training would benefit a business by minimizing material lost
through the leak as well as any imperfections caused by the malfunctioning equipment. It was assumed
that most, if not all, businesses would have a leak inspection program in place because it is cost-
effective to do so. Facilities to which Rule 342 applies would also benefit from the increased clarity of
the rule to reduce non-compliance.
A general description of the probable impact on private and public employment in businesses,
agencies and political subdivisions of this state directly affected by the rulemaking.
Of the 67 facilities with a Title V or Non-Title V permit, 8 belong to non-commercial entities such as
educational or medical facilities, airport authorities, a military air force base, and a governmental
entity. The estimated cost for any of these noncommercial entities is small compared to its operating
budget. As such, the department projects no discernable impacts on the noncommercial facilities.
The department examined the impacts on commercial facilities through two metrics: the ratio of first-
year costs to (a) annual revenue and (b) projected net income. The data source for revenues is the
location/business-specific data in the Demographics Now commercial database. To estimate net
income, the revenues were multiplied by the ratio of net income to revenues reported in IRS statistics
for the wood product manufacturing industry. The national average is that net income is 3.9 percent of
revenues for all businesses in the industry including businesses with no positive net income. The
economic analysis indicates that, under the proposed revisions, the maximum impact was about one-
quarter of one percent (0.24 percent) of revenues. All but five businesses showed less than a 3 percent

reduction in net income as a result of potential incremental costs for complying with the Rule 342
revisions.
The aggregate estimated first-year costs for all commercial facilities is slightly less than $29,000. The
U.S. Commerce Department, Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA) developed the Regional Input-
Output Modeling System (RIMS II) to estimate the loss in output, earnings, and employment
associated with spending increases/decreases by industry and region. For this analysis, the department
used the multipliers for the furniture and related product manufacturing industry in Maricopa Country.
The department compared the estimated losses in output, earnings, and employment against the Gross
Domestic Product (GDP) for durable goods manufacturing in the Phoenix-Mesa-Glendale
Metropolitan Statistical Area (estimated by BEA), annual payroll data for wood furniture fabrication
and coating from the Census County Business Patterns (CPB) data for Maricopa County, the
employment data from the same CPB dataset, and the Bureau of Labor Statistics data on labor force
and unemployment rate for Maricopa County, respectively. The aggregate costs of Rule 342 revisions
lead to no discernable impact on output, employment, or unemployment rate in Maricopa County. The
potential change in earnings is less than 0.07 percent.
A statement of the probable impact of the rulemaking on small businesses.
The economic analysis indicates that, under the proposed revisions, the maximum impact was about
one-quarter of one percent (0.24 percent) of revenues for small businesses. Five small businesses
showed more than a 3 percent reduction and less than a 6.5 percent in net income as a result of
potential incremental costs for complying with the Rule 342 revisions. The actual impacts would be
less because the comparison of costs to net income is made with pre-tax costs and not after-tax costs
and could be lessened by any training programs currently in place.
(a) An identification of the small businesses subject to the rulemaking.
Small businesses subject to this rulemaking are those facilities in Maricopa County with surface
preparation and coating of wood furniture and fixtures that have either fewer than 100 employees
or less than $4 million in revenues for the most recent fiscal year. Of the 67 facilities with a Title
V or Non-Title V permit, 8 are non-commercial and of the 59 commercial businesses, 51 are
considered small.
(b) The administrative and other costs required for compliance with the rulemaking.
The costs to comply with the annual refresher training in the proposed rule revisions will vary for
each business depending on the number of employees. The department estimated that the first-year
cost for a business with 10 employees to comply with all administrative and other costs from the
Rule 342 revisions would be about $315. The aggregate estimated first-year costs for all
commercial facilities is slightly less than $29,000.
(c) A description of the methods that the agency may use to reduce the impact on small
businesses.
(i) Establishing less costly compliance requirements in the rulemaking for small businesses.
By correcting and clarifying existing rule provisions and definitions, this rulemaking lessens
or eases the regulatory burden for small businesses.
(ii) Establishing less costly schedules or less stringent deadlines for compliance in the
rulemaking.
This rulemaking corrects or clarifies existing rule provisions and definitions to reduce
confusion and improve understanding and readability.
(iii) Exempting small businesses from any or all requirements of the rulemaking.
This rulemaking corrects or clarifies existing rule provisions and definitions to reduce
confusion and improve understanding and readability.
(d) The probable cost and benefit to private persons and consumers who are directly affected by
the rulemaking.

Given that the maximum impact on commercial entities is about 0.36 percent of revenues, even a
price increase to recover the costs associated with the Rule 342 revisions would not be discernable
to consumers. Thus, the department projects no discernable impacts on consumers.
A statement of the probable effect on state revenues.
With no discernable costs to pass through to customers, there is no projected change in consumer
purchase patterns and, thus, no impact on state revenues from sales taxes.
A description of any less intrusive or less costly alternative methods of achieving the purpose
of the rulemaking.
This rulemaking corrects or clarifies existing rule provisions and definitions to reduce confusion
and improve understanding and readability. The department also examined an alternative scenario
in which the owner/operator successfully completes an on-line training class and uses the material
in training the other staff. This alternative was more expensive and had less quantifiable benefits
such as reduced VOC emissions. Thus, the department selected the less burdensome alternative.
11. Name and address of department personnel with whom persons may communicate regarding the
accuracy of the economic, small business, and consumer impact:
Name: Hether Krause
Maricopa County Air Quality Department
Planning and Analysis Division
Address: 1001 N Central Avenue, Suite 125
Phoenix, AZ 85004
Telephone: (602) 506-6010
Fax: (602) 506-6179
E-mail: aqplanning@mail.maricopa.gov
12. Description of the changes between the proposed rule, including supplemental notices and final rule:
Since the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking was published on May 13, 2016 (22 A.A.R. 1184), the
department is proposing the following additional amendments:
• Metric equivalents were included to provide consistency throughout the rule.
• Section 504 (Compliance Determination-Test Methods Incorporated by Reference): Included text that
allows for the use of alternative test methods to determine compliance with the rule and that allows test
methods as approved by the Administrator to be used and clarified the provision regarding when more
than one test method is permitted for a compliance determination.
• Appendix A, Section b(1): The metric equivalent of 25 tons was changed to 22.7 megagrams (Mg) to
reflect the accurate conversion of tons to megagrams. Return to list of attachments
13. Summary of the comments made regarding the rule and the department response to them:
Since the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking was published on May 13, 2016 (22 A.A.R. 1184), the
department received no comments.
14. Any other matters prescribed by the statute that are applicable to the specific department or to any
specific rule or class of rules:
Not applicable
15. Incorporations by reference and their location in the rule:
The following test methods are incorporated by reference in Rule 342, Section 502:
EPA Test Method 24—Determination of Volatile Matter Content, Water Content, Density, Volume
Solids, and Weight Solids of Surface Coatings (40 CFR 60, Appendix A-7)

The following test methods are incorporated by reference in Rule 342, Appendix C to Rule 342:
EPA Test Method 25 —Determination of Total Gaseous Nonmethane Organic Emissions as Carbon or
an applicable submethod of Method 25 (Title 40, CFR Part 60, Appendix A)
EPA Test Method 18—Measurement of Gaseous Organic Compound Emissions by Gas
Chromatography
"Guidelines for Determining Capture Efficiency" January 9, 1995, Candace Sorrell, Source
Characterization Group A, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, US EPA.
EPA Test Method 2—Determination of Stack Gas Velocity and Volumetric Flow Rate (Type S Pitot
Tube)
EPA Test Method 2A—Direct Measurement of Gas Volume Through Pipes and Small Ducts
EPA Test Method 2C - Determination of Gas Velocity and Volumetric Flow Rate in Small Stacks or
Ducts (Standard Pitot Tube)
EPA Test Method 2D—Measurement of Gas Volume Flow Rates in Small Pipes and Ducts
16. Was this rule previously an emergency rule?
No
17. Full text of the rule follows: Return to list of attachments
MARICOPA COUNTY
AIR POLLUTION CONTROL REGULATIONS
REGULATION III – CONTROL OF AIR CONTAMINANTS
RULE 342
COATING WOOD FURNITURE AND FIXTURES
INDEX
SECTION 100 – GENERAL
101 PURPOSE
102 APPLICABILITY
103 EXEMPTIONS
SECTION 200 – DEFINITIONS
201 ADHESIVE
202 AEROSOL-SPRAY COATING
203 AIR-ATOMIZED SPRAY (GUN)
204 ARCHITECTURAL COATING
205 BASECOAT
206 CERTIFIED PRODUCT DATA SHEET
207 206 COATING
208 207 CONVENTIONAL AIR-ATOMIZED SPRAY (SYSTEM)
209 208 CUSTOM REPLICA FURNITURE
210 209 DAY
211 210 DILUENT
212 211 ELECTROSTATIC APPLICATION

213 212 EMISSION CONTROL SYSTEM (ECS)
214 213 FACILITY
215 214 FAUX FINISH
216 215 FINISHING MATERIAL
217 216 HIGH SOLIDS STAINS
217 HIGH-VOLUME, LOW PRESSURE (HVLP) SPRAY GUN
218 KILOGRAMS VOC PER KILOGRAM OF COATING SOLIDS
219 LOW PRESSURE SPRAY GUN
220 LOW SOLIDS STAINS
221 NONPERMANENT FINAL FINISH
222 POUNDS VOC PER POUND OF COATING SOLIDS
223 REPAIR COATING
224 RESTRICTED-USE GUN
225 SEALER OR PRIMER
226 SINGLE RESIN-LAYER FINISH
227 STAIN
228 STRIPPABLE BOOTH COATING
229 STRIPPING OPERATION
230 TOPCOAT
231 TOUCH UP COATING
232 TRANSFER EFFICIENCY
233 VOC-BORNE COATING
234 VOC-CONTAINING SOLVENT
235 WASHCOAT
236 WOOD FURNITURE AND FIXTURES
237 WOOD-PRODUCT
238 WORKING DAY
SECTION 300 – STANDARDS
301 LIMITATIONS–VOC CONTENT
302 LIMITATION OF CONVENTIONAL AIR-ATOMIZED SPRAY AND OTHER SPRAY
METHODS ATOMIZING WITH HIGH-PRESSURE AIR
303 OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE
304 VOC LEAK DETECTION AND REPAIR
304 305 CLEANUP AND CLEANING SUPPLY AND APPLICATION EQUIPMENT
305 306 HANDLING AND DISPOSAL OF VOC-CONTAINING MATERIALS
306 DESIGNATION OF VOC-CONTENT REQUIREMENT
307 EXEMPTIONS

SECTION 400 – ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS
401 COMPLIANCE SCHEDULE FOR APPENDIX C
402 REGULATORY CLARIFICATION
403 GUN TAGGING REQUIREMENTS ANNUAL OPERATOR TRAINING REQUIREMENTS TO
REDUCE VOC EMISSIONS
SECTION 500 – MONITORING AND RECORDS
501 RECORDKEEPING AND REPORTING
502 COMPLIANCE DETERMINATION–TEST METHODS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE
APPENDIX A TO RULE 342
APPENDIX B – A SHORT-FORM OPTION
APPENDIX C TO RULE 342
Adopted 04/03/96
Revised 11/20/96
Revised 09/25/13
Adopted 04/03/1996; Revised 11/20/1996; Revised 09/25/2013; and Revised MM/DD/YYYY
MARICOPA COUNTY
AIR POLLUTION CONTROL REGULATIONS
REGULATION III – CONTROL OF AIR CONTAMINANTS
RULE 342
COATING WOOD FURNITURE AND FIXTURES
SECTION 100 – GENERAL
101 PURPOSE: To limit emissions of volatile organic compounds (VOC) from the surface preparation and
coating of wood furniture and fixtures.
102 APPLICABILITY: The provisions of this rule apply to any facility in Maricopa County applying
finishing material to furniture or fixtures made of wood or wood derived material. Simplified provisions of
Appendix B in this rule may be used by facilities which agree to a permit limit of less than 10 tons (9.1
megagrams (Mg)) of VOC emissions per year. For sources emitting less than 2 tons (1.8 Mg) of VOC per
year, consult subsection 307.2d refer to Section 103.2(d) of this rule. This rule does not apply to the coating
of any millwork included under SIC code #2431 (Millwork).
Table 342-1: APPLICABLE STANDARD INDUSTRIAL CLASSIFICATION (SIC) CODES*
Standard Industrial Classification SIC Title
(SIC) code
2434 Wood Kitchen Cabinets
2511 Wood Household Furniture, Except Upholstered
2512 Wood Household Furniture, Upholstered
2517 Wood Television, Radio, Phonograph, and Sewing Machine Cabinets
2519 Household Furniture, Not Elsewhere Classified
2521 Wood Office Furniture
2531 Public Building and Related Furniture

2541 Wood Office and Store Fixtures, Partitions, Shelving, and Lockers
2599 Furniture and Fixtures, Not Elsewhere Classified
2515 Mattresses, Foundations, and Convertible Beds
*Per the United States Department of Labor Occupational Safety and Health Administration. Web access at
https://osha.gov/index.html
103 EXEMPTIONS:
103.1 Total Exemptions:
a. This rule does not apply to the coating of any millwork included under SIC code 2431
Millwork.
b. The following materials are exempt from this rule:
(1) Adhesives.
(2) Architectural coatings.
(3) Printing ink.
(4) Coatings that are not applied on or over a wood product substrate.
c. Sources subject to Rule 342 are exempt from the following Maricopa County Air Pollution
Control Regulations:
(1) Rule 330 (Volatile Organic Compounds)
(2) Rule 336 (Surface Coating Operations)
103.2 Partial Exemptions:
a. Aerosol Spray Can Coating: Coatings in aerosol spray cans not exceeding 22 fl. oz. (0.66
liter) capacity and used exclusively for touch-up and/or repairs are subject to only the
reporting requirements in Section 500 of this rule.
b. The following are exempt from the VOC limits in Section 301.1 of this rule, but shall comply
with all other provisions of this rule:
(1) The use of the following coating types when the annual total use of all such types
together is less than 250 gallons (948 liters):
(a) Prepackaged aerosol spray cans which are not used for touch-up or repair;
(b) Metal leaf finishes; and
(c) Faux finishes.
(2) Refinishing, Replacement, and Custom Replica Furniture Operations:
(a) Any refinishing operation necessary for preservation;
(b) To return the furniture or fixture to original condition;
(c) To replace missing furniture to produce a matching set; or
(d) To produce custom replica furniture.
(3) Stains, washcoats, glazes, toners, inks, and other coatings not specified in Section 301.1
of this rule.
c. The coating for a single resin-layer finish which does not exceed a VOC limit of 3 lb VOC/lb
solids (3 kg VOC/kg solids) for completed finishes up to 3 dry mils thickness or does not
exceed 2.3 lb VOC/lb solids (2.3 kg VOC/kg solids) for finishes over 3 dry mils is exempt
from the VOC limits of Section 301.1 of this rule if all of the following conditions are met:
(1) The containers are clearly marked "FOR USE IN SINGLE RESIN LAYER FINISH";

(2) Facility records clearly identify this material: "DOES NOT MEET THE VOC LIMITS
OF SECTION 301, RULE 342. FOR USE ONLY IN SINGLE RESIN-LAYER
FINISHES"; and
(3) The booth used to apply a single resin-layer finish above 2.3 lb VOC/lb solids (2.3 kg
VOC/kg solids) is dedicated to that operation only, and is clearly labeled "FOR SINGLE
RESIN-LAYER FINISHES ONLY".
d. Small Source Status: A furniture coating facility which at any time demonstrates that it
currently meets all the requirements in Sections 103.2(d)(1) of this rule is exempt from all
provisions of this rule except for the sections listed in Section 103.2(d)(2) of this rule.
(1) Small Source Status Requirements:
(a) Facility records demonstrate that no more than a total of 55 gallons (209 liters) of
VOC-containing wood-product coatings and VOC-containing solvent are used in any
consecutive 12-month period; and
(b) The monthly total usage of VOC-containing wood-product coatings and VOC-
containing solvent divided by that month’s number of working days of coating
application does not exceed 3.0 gallons (11.4 liters) per working day; and
(c) The facility emits less than 4000 pounds (1814 kg) VOC, facility-wide per year from
all wood-product coating operations, all VOC-containing diluent added to coatings,
all VOC-containing solvent cleaning and stripping, and VOC-containing solvent
used for coating equipment cleanup.
(2) Small Sources shall comply with all of the following sections of Rule 342:
(a) Section 303: OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE;
(b) Section 304: LEAK DETECTION AND REPAIR;
(c) Section 306: HANDLING AND DISPOSAL OF VOC-CONTAINING MATERIAL;
(d) Section 400: ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS; and
(e) Section 500: MONITORING AND RECORDS.
e. Using Conventional and other Restricted Use Guns: In addition to the uses of restricted-
use guns allowed under Sections 302.2(a), (b), and (c) of this rule, an owner or operator may
use a conventional air-atomized or other restricted use gun to apply coatings exceeding 1 lb
VOC/1 lb solids (1kg VOC/1 kg solids) if both of the following conditions are met:
(1) The volume of such coating applied in this way is less than five percent (5%) of the total
semi-annual volume of coating applied at the facility; and
(2) A log is kept pursuant to Section 501.2(c) of this rule of the amount of coating used by
each such gun. This shall be done daily or each time coating is added to the gun’s coating
reservoir; and semi-annual calculation shall be made pursuant to Section 501.2 of this
rule.
SECTION 200 – DEFINITIONS: For the purpose of this rule, the following definitions shall apply, in addition to
those definitions found in Rule 100 (General Provisions and Definitions) of these rules. In the event of any
inconsistency between any of the Maricopa County air pollution control rules, the definitions in this rule take
precedence.
201 ADHESIVE: Any substance, usually having a fluid phase during application, used principally to bond two
or more surfaces into close proximity with one another.
202 AEROSOL SPRAY COATING: A coating which is sold in a hand-held, pressurized, non-refillable
container, usually of less than 22 fluid ounces (0.66 liter) capacity, and which is expelled from the
container in a finely divided form when a valve on the container is depressed.

203 AIR-ATOMIZED SPRAY (GUN): Equipment used to apply coatings in which the chief means of
atomizing the coating is via pressurized air which also mixes into the cloud of coating particles after
expulsion from a spray nozzle.
204 ARCHITECTURAL COATING: Any coating applied to stationary structures and their appurtenances, to
mobile homes, to pavements or to curbs.
205 BASECOAT: A coat of colored material, usually opaque, that is applied before graining inks, glazing
coats, or other high-hiding finishing materials. A basecoated surface usually receives a topcoat also.
206 CERTIFIED PRODUCT DATA SHEET: A document, signed by an officer of a coating-supplying
operation, stating precisely the maximum VOC content of a particular coating as supplied.
207 206 COATING: Any liquid, fluid, or mastic composition which is converted to a solid (or semi-solid)
protective, decorative, or adherent film or deposit after application to a substrate as a thin layer.
208 207 CONVENTIONAL AIR-ATOMIZED SPRAY: Any spray coating method in which the coating is
atomized principally by mixing it with compressed air at an air pressure greater than 10 pounds per square
inch (gauge) at the point of atomization, and which is not used with an electrostatic transfer system. Airless
and air-assisted airless spray technologies are not conventional air-atomized spray because the principal
means of atomizing the coating is via hydraulic pressure and not by mixing the coating with compressed
air.
209 208 CUSTOM REPLICA FURNITURE: Furniture individually produced or repaired after an order has been
received from a client specifying a particular style and period, using both the style and the methods of
construction, including materials, joinery, and finishes, which are authentic to the period.
210 209 DAY: A period of 24 consecutive hours beginning at midnight.
211 210 DILUENT: For the purpose of this rule, any fluid in or added to a coating such as thinner, retarder,
reducer, solvent, or drying accelerator which solubilizes, adjusts concentration, viscosity, flow, or drying
rates and which evaporates as the coating film solidifies and cures.
212 211 ELECTROSTATIC APPLICATION: A method of applying coating by electrically charging coating
droplets or particles causing their deposition onto a substrate by electrostatic attraction.
213 212 EMISSION CONTROL SYSTEM (ECS): A system for reducing emissions of organic compounds,
consisting of both collection and control devices which are approved in writing by the Control Officer and
are designed and operated in accordance with good engineering practice.
214 213 FACILITY: For the purpose of this rule, all the pollutant-emitting activities located on one or more
contiguous or adjacent properties, under the control of the same person or persons under common control,
and described by one or more of the industrial groupings listed in Section 238 236 of this rule.
215 214 FAUX FINISH: A finish intended to simulate a surface other than wood, including, but not limited to,
stone, sand, metal, fur and leather.
216 215 FINISHING MATERIAL: A coating other than one designed solely or principally as an adhesive,
temporary maskant, and/or preservative. For wood furniture and fixtures, finishing materials include, but
are not limited to, topcoats, sealers, primers, stains, basecoats, washcoats, enamels, toners, glazes, and
graining inks.
217 216 HIGH SOLIDS STAINS: Stains which are formulated to enhance wood grain and change wood color, but
not conceal surface grain. For the purpose of this rule, high solids stains are stains that contain at least 120
grams of solids per liter (1 lb/gal) of stain as applied, and can include wiping stains and glazes.
217 HIGH-VOLUME, LOW PRESSURE (HVLP) SPRAY GUN: Spray equipment that is used to apply
coating by means of a spray gun that operates at 10 psig of atomizing air pressure or less at the center of the
air cap. A permanently affixed manufacturer’s gun identification or manufacturer’s gun literature shall
identify and be proof of an HVLP gun.
218 KILOGRAMS VOC PER KILOGRAM OF COATING SOLIDS: A measurement that is used in this
rule to express the VOC content of a coating. For any coating, kilograms VOC per kilogram coating solids

is numerically identical to both pounds of VOC per pound of coating solids and to grams VOC per gram of
coating solids. Abbreviations used include kg VOC/kg solids (lb VOC/lb solids) or simply kg/kg (lb/lb).
219 LOW PRESSURE SPRAY GUN: An air-atomized spray gun which by design functions best at tip air cap
pressures below 10 psig (0.7 bar) measured according to subsection Section 502.2 of this rule, and for
which the manufacturer makes no public claims that the gun can be used effectively above 12 psig (0.8
bar).
220 LOW SOLIDS STAINS: Stains which are formulated to enhance wood grain and change wood color, but
not conceal surface grain. For the purpose of this rule, low solids stains are stains that contain up to one (1)
pound of solids per one gallon (120 grams of solids per liter) (1 lb/gal) of stain as applied, and include sap
stain, toner, and non-grain-raising (NGR) stains.
221 NONPERMANENT FINAL FINISH: A material such as wax, polish, non-oxidizing oil or similar
substance which retains its effect only temporarily and must be periodically reapplied to a surface to
maintain or restore the material’s intended effect.
222 POUNDS VOC PER POUND OF COATING SOLIDS: A measurement of a coating’s VOC content
identical with kilograms VOC per kilogram of coating solids.
223 REPAIR COATING: A coating used to recoat portions of a previously coated product to cover
mechanical damage to that previous coating following normal painting operations.
224 RESTRICTED-USE GUN: Any spray gun which atomizes coating using compressed air, such that in
normal use or a use advertised by the manufacturer or distributor, the tip air cap pressure exceeds 12 psig
(0.8 bar) in measurements done pursuant to subsection 502.2 Section 500 of this rule. Restricted-use gun
also includes, but is not limited to, all conventional air-atomized spray guns.
225 SEALER OR PRIMER: A film-building finishing material used to seal the pores of wood or wood-
derived material before additional coats of finishing material are applied. Finishing materials used
primarily to alter the appearance or color of the substrate, such as stains, washcoats, glazes, inks, and
toners, are not sealers.
226 SINGLE RESIN-LAYER FINISH: A completed, consumer ready finish, which has received only one
application of resin-based coating serving as both sealer and topcoat, and having a total average dry finish
thickness from the top of the finish to the surface of the wood-product substrate not exceeding 3 mils
(0.076 mm) before sanding, as determined pursuant to the test method in subsection 502.3 Section 500 of
this rule. If a washcoat is also used, the finish is not a single resin-layer finish.
227 STAIN: A coating, excluding sealers and topcoats, that is formulated to enhance wood grain and change
wood color, but not conceal surface grain. Stain includes all high solids stains and all low solids stains.
228 STRIPPABLE BOOTH COATING: A coating which is applied to spray booth surfaces to receive the
overspray and protect the substrate, and which is designed to be readily pulled off in strips or sheets and
disposed of.
229 STRIPPING OPERATION: Any operation in which organic VOC-containing solvent is used to remove
coating from a substrate.
230 TOPCOAT: The last permanent, functional film-building finishing material applied to a manufactured
wood product. When the wood-product substrate is already sealed with sealer, any further coats that build a
functional film are topcoats. Finishing materials used primarily to alter the appearance or color of the
substrate, such as stains, washcoats, glazes, inks, and toners are not topcoats. A nonpermanent final finish
is not a topcoat.
231 TOUCH UP COATING: A coating used to cover minor coating imperfections after the main coating
operation.
232 TRANSFER EFFICIENCY: The ratio of the weight of coating solids deposited on an object to the total
weight of coating solids used in a coating application step or series of such steps, expressed as a
percentage.

233 VOC-BORNE COATING: A coating in which the volatile portion contains, by weight, more VOC than
water.
234 VOC-CONTAINING SOLVENT: A solvent or diluent, used to solvate, dilute, reduce, thin, clean or strip,
in which the weight-percent of VOC exceeds the weight percent of water.
235 WASHCOAT: A transparent special purpose coating having a solids content by mass of 12.0
percent (12.0%) or less, and which is used to seal wood-product surfaces for any of the following purposes:
to prevent undesired staining, to control penetration of subsequent finishes, to provide a barrier when paper
laminates are applied to the wood-product, to seal glazes, and to improve adhesion of a waterborne topcoat.
236 WOOD FURNITURE AND FIXTURES: All furnishings made of wood-product that are included in
Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) numbers code 2434, 2511, 2512, 2515, 2517, 2519, 2521, 2531, or
2541, or 2599 as well as wood-product on convertible furniture under SIC number 2515.
237 WOOD-PRODUCT: Wood or wood-derived material, such as chipboard, particle board, fiberboard,
pressed board, paper, and any other material derived from wood, bamboo, cane, or rattan, that retains some
of the physical structure(s) of such original material(s), even if only at a microscopic level.
238 WORKING DAY: A day, or any part of a day, in which a facility is engaged in manufacturing the
application of VOC-containing finishing material to wood furniture or fixtures.
SECTION 300 – STANDARDS
301 LIMITATIONS – VOC CONTENT:
301.1 No person An owner or operator shall not apply a topcoat or sealer to wood furniture or fixtures or
shall not apply a strippable booth coating unless VOC content is limited to the pounds of VOC per
pound of solids (kg VOC/kg solids) or to the grams of VOC per liter the VOC limits in one of the
columns in Table 342-2 below:
a. General VOC Limits of Coatings
Table 1
Column A Column B
Lb VOC/lb solids Grams VOC/liter **
Topcoat 1.8 635
Sealer 1.9 645
Acid-cured, alkyd amino topcoat 2.0 655
Acid-cured, alkyd amino vinyl sealer 2.3 680
**less non-precursor compounds & water
Table 342-2: General VOC Limits of Coatings
Lb VOC/lb solids is
Coating Type equivalent to kg lb VOC /Gallon* Grams VOC/liter*
VOC/kg solids
Sealer 1.9 5.38 lb/gal 645 g/l
Topcoat 1.8 5.29 lb/gal 635 g/l
Acid-Cured Alkyd Amino Vinyl Sealer 2.3 5.67 lb/gal 680 g/l
Acid-Cured Alkyd Amino Conversion 2.0 5.46 lb/gal 655 g/l
Varnish Topcoat
Strippable Booth Coating 0.8 3.0 lb/gal 360 g/l
Low VOC Topcoat (No VOC limit for 0.8 3.0 lb/gal 360 g/l

Lb VOC/lb solids is
Coating Type equivalent to kg lb VOC /Gallon* Grams VOC/liter*
VOC/kg solids
Sealer when used with low VOC
topcoat)
* less non-precursor compounds and water
b. Option: Lower VOC topcoat and Unlimited Sealer: There is no VOC limit on sealer when the
sealer’s topcoat does not exceed 0.8 lb VOC/lb (0.8 kg/kg).
c. Coatings with no VOC limits: Stains, washcoats, glazes, toners, inks, and other coatings not
specified in this subsection 301.1 nor in subsection 301.2 have no VOC limits.
301.2 Strippable Booth Coatings: No person shall use a strippable booth coating unless, as applied, the
coating has either no more than 0.8 lb VOC/lb solids or no more than 3.0 lb/gal (360 g/l) less non-
precursor volatile compounds.
301.3 301.2 Emission Control System (ECS) as an Alternative Control: A facility may meet the VOC
limits of either or both subsections 301.1 and 301.2 Section 301.1 of this rule if the owner or
operator complies with all provisions in this rule’s Appendix C: ALTERNATIVE COMPLIANCE
WITH SECTION 301 VOC LIMITS AND/OR SECTION 302 SPRAY-METHOD
RESTRICTIONS BY USING AN EMISSIONS CONTROL DEVICE and with the other
applicable provisions of this rule.
301.4 301.3 Averaging: An owner or operator of a larger furniture coating facility meeting the applicability
requirements of subsection b., in this rule’s Appendix A: AN AVERAGING ALTERNATIVE,
may comply with subsection 301.1a. Section 301.1 of this rule by complying with Averaging-
Formula 1 or Averaging-Formula 2 in Appendix A and by complying with all other applicable
provisions of Appendix A.
301.5 301.4 Smaller Source Option: The owner or operator of a facility that has emitted 2 two (2) or more
tons (1.8 Mg) but less than 10 ten (10) tons (9.1 Mg) per year of VOC from all wood coating and
associated operations is exempted from all provisions under Sections 300, 400, and 501 (but not
Sections 100, 200, and 502) if all provisions are complied with in this rule’s Appendix B: A
SHORT-FORM OPTION. Sources emitting less than 2 two (2) tons (1.8 Mg) of VOC per year
may be allowed exemptions pursuant to subsection 307.2d Section 103.2(d) of this rule.
302 LIMITATION OF CONVENTIONAL AIR-ATOMIZED SPRAY AND OTHER SPRAY
METHODS ATOMIZING WITH HIGH-PRESSURE AIR:
302.1 Evidence of Transfer-Efficient Spray Equipment: No person An owner or operator shall not
spray wood furniture with coating exceeding 1 lb VOC/lb solids (1 kg VOC/kg solids) without
providing evidence of possession and use or manufacturer’s specifications of a low pressure spray
gun or system,; an HVLP spray gun; an electrostatic system,; or a system in which the energy for
atomization is provided principally via hydraulic pressure; this includes air assisted airless and
ultra-low-volume-air assisted technologies. Such requirement does not apply to any facility,
activity or person specifically exempted by applicable subsections of Section 307 Section 103 of
this rule, or to any specific system which is approved by the Administrator as having a transfer
efficiency consistently exceeding 64%. HVLP-equivalent.
302.2 Limitation of Air-Atomized Spray Gun other than Low Pressure or HVLP Spray Guns: No
personAn owner or operator shall not use a conventional air-atomized spray gun or other restricted
use gun, except:
a. To apply finishing materials that have a VOC content not exceeding 1.0 lb VOC/lb solids (1.0
kg/kg).
b. If VOC emissions from the finishing application station, employing such a gun, are captured
and directed to an ECS, pursuant to the provisions of Appendix C: ALTERNATIVE

COMPLIANCE WITH SECTION 301 VOC LIMITS AND/OR SECTION 302 SPRAY-
METHOD RESTRICTIONS BY USING AN EMISSIONS CONTROL DEVICE.
c. For touch-up and repair under either of the following conditions:
(1) suchThe application is performed after completion of the entire finishing operation; or
(2) suchThe application is performed after applying stain, and before any further coating, by
equipment having a total capacity not exceeding 2.1 gallons (8 liters).
d. To apply less than 5%five percent (5%) of all coating pursuant to subsection 307.2.eSection
103.2(e)(1) of this rule.
303 OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE: Any person An owner or operator subject to this rule shall
operate and maintain in proper working order all process equipment in which VOC-containing materials
are used or stored.
304 VOC LEAK DETECTION AND REPAIR:
304.1 Leak Inspection: An owner or operator shall conduct a visual inspection once per month of
pumps, valves, flanges, or other equipment used to transfer or apply VOC-containing finishing
materials or VOC-containing solvents.
304.2 Leak Repair: The owner or operator shall repair a leak within the time frames listed below:
a. A first attempt to repair a leak shall be made no later than five (5) working days after the leak
was first detected.
b. Final repairs shall be made within fifteen (15) working days after the leak was first detected
unless the leaking equipment is to be either:
(1) Removed from service within three (3) months after the leak was first detected; or
(2) Replaced by a new purchase within three (3) months after the leak was first detected.
304 305 CLEANUP AND CLEANING SUPPLY AND APPLICATION EQUIPMENT:
304.1 305.1 Booth Cleaning: No personAn owner or operator shall not clean spray booth components using
a VOC-containing solvent containing more than 8.0eight percent (8.0%) by weight of VOC,
including water and non-precursor compounds, except for: conveyors; continuous coaters and their
enclosures; and metal filters and while refurbishing spray booths. If the spray strippable booth
coating is being replaced, a person an owner or operator shall not use no more than 1.0 gallon (3.8
liters) VOC-containing solvent per booth to clean the spray booth.
304.2 305.2 Cleaning Guns and Lines: A person An owner or operator shall collect all VOC-
containing solvent used to clean spray guns and shall pump or drain all VOC-containing solvent
used for line cleaning into non-leaking container(s). Such containers shall be immediately closed
or covered after all the VOC-containing solvent has been collected, and shall remain so except
when in use.
305 306 HANDLING AND DISPOSAL OF VOC-CONTAINING MATERIALS:
305.1 306.1 Use and Storage: A person An owner or operator shall cover and keep covered each VOC-
containing material intended for the day’s production, which is not currently in use. A person An
owner or operator shall store VOC-containing finishing and cleaning materials in closed
containers.
305.2 306.2 Disposal of VOC and VOC-Containing Material: A person An owner or operator shall store all
VOC-containing materials intended for disposal, including, but not limited to, rags, waste
coatings, waste solvents and their residues, in closed containers, which are legibly labeled with
their contents and which shall remain covered when not in use except when contents are being
added or removed.
306 DESIGNATION OF VOC-CONTENT REQUIREMENT: Effective May 3, 1996, a manufacturer of wood-
furniture coatings which are subject to this rule shall provide on each coating container or as an

accompanying specification of each coating container a designation of VOC content. For topcoats and
sealers, this shall be in pounds of VOC per pound of coating solids (g/g) or in pounds VOC per gallon
(g/lg) less water and non-precursor volatile compounds. This requirement shall not apply to containers
having a capacity of one liter (1.05 quart) or less.
307 EXEMPTIONS:
307.1 Total Exemption: The following materials are exempt from this rule: adhesives, architectural
coatings, printing ink, and coatings not applied on or over a wood product substrate.
307.2 Partial Exemptions:
a. Touch-up Cans: Coatings in aerosol spray cans not exceeding 22 fl. oz. (0.66 liter) capacity
used exclusively for touch-up and/or repairs are subject only to the recording requirements of
this rule.
b. The following shall be exempt from subsection 301.1 and Section 302:
(1) The use of the following coating types when the annual total use of all such types
together is less than 250 gallons (948 liters): prepackaged aerosol spray cans which are
not used for touch-up or repair, metal leaf finishes, and faux finishes.
(2) Refinishing, Replacement, and Custom Replica Furniture Operations: Any refinishing
operation necessary for preservation, to return the furniture or fixture to original
condition, to replace missing furniture to produce a matching set, or to produce custom
replica furniture.
c. The coating for a single resin-layer finish which does not exceed a VOC limit of 3 lb VOC/lb
solids for completed finishes up to 3 dry mils thickness or does not exceed 2.3 lb/lb for
finishes over 3 dry mils is exempt from the VOC-limits of subsection 301.1 if all of the
following conditions are met:
(1) The containers are clearly marked "FOR USE IN SINGLE RESIN LAYER FINISH";
(2) Facility records clearly identify this material: "DOES NOT MEET THE VOC LIMITS
OF SECTION 301, RULE 342. – FOR USE ONLY IN SINGLE RESIN-LAYER
FINISHES"; and
(3) The booth used to apply a single resin-layer finish above 2.3 lb VOC/lb solids is
dedicated to that operation only, and is clearly labeled "FOR SINGLE RESIN-LAYER
FINISHES ONLY".
d. Small Source Status: A furniture coating facility which at any time demonstrates that it
currently meets all the requirements in subsections 307.2d (1) and (2) of this rule following, is
exempt from all provisions of this rule except for Section 303 “Operation & Maintenance”
and Section 305 "Handling and Disposal of VOC". An operator of such an exempted facility
shall keep on the premises current records of all coating related materials currently used, and
their VOC content. For this purpose, a complete, updated set of receipts/invoices and Material
Safety Data Sheets (MSDSs) will suffice if each receipt/invoice is retained on the premises at
least two years.
(1) Facility records demonstrate that no more than a total of 55 gallons (209 liters) of VOC-
borne wood-product coatings plus VOC-solvent are used in any month and that such
monthly total divided by that month’s number of days of coating application does not
exceed 3.0 gallons (11.4 liters); and
(2) The facility emits less than 1814 kg (4000 lb) VOC, facility-wide per year from all wood-
product coating operations including VOC in both solvent-borne and water-borne
coatings, all VOC diluent added to coatings, all solvent cleaning and stripping, and VOC
solvent used for coating equipment cleanup.
e. Using Conventional and other Restricted Use Guns; Red Tag: In addition to the uses of
restricted-use guns allowed under subsections 302.2 a., b., and c., a person may use a

conventional air-atomized or other restricted use gun to apply coatings exceeding 1 lb VOC/lb
if all the following conditions are met:
(1) The volume of such coating applied in this way is less than 5% of the total volume of
coating applied at the facility;
(2) Each gun has a red tag when spraying materials exceeding 1 lb VOC/lb. Requirements
for gun tagging are in Section 403;
(3) A log shall be kept pursuant to subsection 501.2c. of the amount of coating used by each
such gun. This shall be done daily or each time coating is added to the gun’s coating
reservoir; and semi-annual calculation shall be made, pursuant to subsection 501.2.
Errata Note11
e. Using Conventional and other Restricted Use Guns; Red Tag: In addition to the uses of
restricted-use guns allowed under subsections 302.2 a., b., and c., a person may use a
conventional air-atomized or other restricted use gun to apply coatings exceeding 1 lb VOC/lb
if all the following conditions are met:
(1) The volume of such coating applied in this way is less than 5% of the total volume of
coating applied at the facility;
(2) Each gun has a red tag when spraying materials exceeding 1 lb VOC/lb. Requirements
for gun tagging are in Section 403;
(3) A log shall be kept pursuant to subsection 501.2c. of the amount of coating used by each
such gun. This shall be done daily or each time coating is added to the gun’s coating
reservoir; and semi-annual calculation shall be made, pursuant to subsection 501.2.
SECTION 400 – ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS
401 COMPLIANCE SCHEDULE FOR APPENDIX C: The following schedule applies, with exceptions for
an Emission Control System provided in Appendix C.
401.1 Sources Emitting 50 TPY: Each facility which has applied for or received a Title V permit, or a
permit with an annual VOC limit of 50 tons (45.35 Mg) or more, or which has had an aggregate
VOC emission to atmosphere after December 31, 1989, of 50.0 tons (45.35 Mg) or more in any
calendar year or 300 pounds (136 kg) or more in any working day, emitted in compliance with all
requirements of this rule and have submitted must submit a Control Plan. The Control Plan shall
set forth the maximum VOC content of each coating-as-applied and provide documentation
showing how these values were determined.
401.2 Other Sources: The schedule follows for anyAny wood furniture and/or fixture facility with total
VOC emissions to atmosphere in each of the years 1990 through 1995 of no more than 300 pounds
(136 kg) in any working day and 50.0 tons (45.35 Mg) in any calendar year, emitted from wood
coating operations and associated cleaning processes:, which has emitted more than 25 tons (22.7
Mg) of VOC from coating operations in any of the years 1993 through 1995 must submit a
Control Plan, setting forth the maximum VOC content and copies of the documentation showing
how the coating-as-applied values were determined.
a. A facility shall be in compliance with all applicable provisions of this rule, except for Section
301 and Section 302 by May 3, 1996. Such facility shall be in compliance with Section 301
and Section 302 of this rule by November 15, 1996.
b. Control Plan: A facility which has emitted more than 25 tons of VOC from coating operations
in any of the years 1993 through 1995 must submit a Control Plan by August 1, 1996, setting
forth the maximum VOC content and copies of the documentation showing how the coating-
as-applied values were determined.
1 1 This errata note is not part of Rule 342. For the reader’s convenience, the second subsection 307.2e. was an
earlier draft of the section not intended to be left in the rule. It will be removed for the next revision of this rule.

402 REGULATORY CLARIFICATION:
402.1 Status with Respect to Rules 330 (Volatile Organic Compounds) and 336 (Surface Coating
Operations): No A wood furniture or fixture coating operation is not subject to Rule 330 or to
Rule 336 of these rules.
402.2 Component Materials that were Subject to Prior Regulation: The regulatory status of
facilities, owners or operators is not affected by the fact that component materials, such as wood
composites or paneling, may have been subject to Reasonably Available Control Technology
(RACT) or other regulatory requirements in their original manufacture, before their subsequent
use by a facility in Maricopa County.
402.3 Other Rules: Nothing in this rule exempts a person from complying with the NESHAP (National
Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants) for coating wood furniture and fixtures or from
complying with any other applicable Federal, states, and local laws or regulations.
402.4 Coating over Wood Coating(s) the same as Coating onto Wood: The VOC limits for finishing
materials given in section 301.1 Section 301.1 of this rule apply to such coatings whether applied
directly onto any area of wood-product substrate or on any intermediate layer(s) of coating on the
wood-product substrate.
403 GUN TAGGING REQUIREMENTS: An owner or operator shall use a red 4 square-inch vivid, durable
tag, sticker, or painted emblem/label visible on the gun or within 3 ft of the gun on the gun’s hose to meet
the tagging/labeling requirements of subsection 307.2e.
403 ANNUAL OPERATOR TRAINING REQUIREMENTS TO REDUCE VOC EMISSIONS:
403.1 An owner or operator shall train new and existing employees in the coating application, cleanup,
and finish equipment operation if the employee uses VOC-containing materials. Training must
include the following information:
a. Proper coating application;
b. Cleaning, washoff , and waste procedures;
c. Proper finish equipment operation; and
d. Methods to reduce solvent usage.
403.2 Employees hired after [adoption date of this rule], shall be trained upon hiring, unless previously
trained within the past year.
403.3 Employees hired prior to [adoption date of this rule], shall be trained by [six months after adoption
date of this rule].
403.4 Employees shall be given refresher training annually.
403.5 Training records shall be maintained per Section 500 of this rule.
SECTION 500 – MONITORING AND RECORDS
501 RECORDKEEPING AND REPORTING: An owner or operator shall keep the following records and
lists in a consistent and complete manner and shall make them available to the Control Officer without
delay during normal business hours. Each record shall be maintained a minimum of five (5) years.
501.1 Current List:
a. VOC-Containing Materials: A current list of all VOC-containing material shall be
maintained which contains their name or code and their VOC content. Any qualified single
resin-layer finish shall be identified as such. VOC-containing material list shall be updated by
the end of the following month.
b. How to Express VOC Content:
(1) Non-Coatings: Use grams VOC/liter or lb VOC/gal. for reducers, thinners, cleaners, etc.

(2) Stains: Use lb VOC/gal.
(3) Topcoats and Sealers: Use either lbs VOC/lb solids or g VOC/liter (lb VOC/gal) except:
(a) Any topcoat or sealer sprayed with a conventional or other restricted use gun shall be
expressed in lbs VOC/lb solids.
(b) Two VOC content values must appear for each topcoat and each sealer that is
expressed as grams VOC per liter or pounds VOC per gallon: both grams VOC/liter
(lb VOC/gal) including water and non-precursor organic compounds, and grams
VOC/liter (lb VOC/gal) less water and non-precursor organic compounds.
(4) Other Coatings: Use grams/liter (or lb/gal) or lbs VOC/lb solids for coatings that are
neither sealers nor topcoats, such as washcoats, glazes, etc.
c. Acceptable Format: VOC-containing materials shall be listed neatly and completely. The
following is an example of an acceptable method:
Example: Identify and list each VOC-containing material in one of the following 6 categories:
1. topcoats; 2. sealers; 3. catalyst/hardeners; 4. diluents, such as reducers, coating solvents and
thinners; 5. cleaning and stripping solvents; and 6. other VOC-containing materials. Next to
each material, record the VOC-content found on the container, an MSDS, an invoice, or other
source.
d. b. Mix Ratios: A current list of VOC-containing mix ratios for catalyst/hardeners shall be
maintained if of the manufacturer's recommended mix ratio is not followed or of components,
including but not limited to adding reducers and catalyst/hardeners, except when the
manufacturer has no recommendations for any additions.
501.2 Schedule for Recording Material Usage:
a. Daily Updates for Non-Compliant Material: The amount of each working day’s use of each
topcoat, sealer or booth material that exceeds applicable VOC limits of Section 301 or
Section 304 305 of this rule shall be totaled and logged by the end of the
following workday working day. VOC content shall be entered for each such material.
b. Monthly Update for Materials Compliant with Sections 301 and 304 305 of this Rule: By
the end of the following month, an owner or operator shall update the following records for
each month:
(1) For each topcoat and sealer to which reducer is added at any time after its arrival at a
facility, enter the VOC content in lb VOC/lb solids (kg VOC/kg solids) or in grams/liter
(lb/gal) lb VOC/gal (grams VOC/liter), less water and non-precursor organic
compounds. This requirement shall not apply if the reducer is itself compliant with
respective topcoat’s and sealer’s VOC limit in Table 342-2 of this rule.
(2) The amount of coating, the amount of catalyst/hardener, and the amount of
reducer/coating diluent used.
(3) The quantity and type name of organic VOC-containing solvent used each month for
stripping and cleaning.
(4) The quantity of organic VOC-containing solvent disposed of offsite during the month just
ended.
(5) Exception: Update yearly the totals of the usage of each VOC-containing material
known to be used in amounts less than 15 gallons (57 liters) per year.
c. Semi-Annual Updates of Coatings Applied with Restricted Use Gun: Records associated
with the Section 302 limitations on the use of conventional air-atomized spray equipment and
other restricted-use guns shall be kept. These records shall show for each semi-annual period
the volume (VR) of finishing materials exceeding solids (1 lb VOC/ lb solids) (1 kg VOC/kg
solids) applied with conventional air-atomized spray guns and other restricted use guns. In
addition, the total volume of all finishing material (AMV) used throughout the facility shall be

determined. The total volume (VR) so applied over the previous six-months is divided by the
total of all coatings used in the same period (AMV) and these calculations and the result are
entered in the log.
501.3 Disposal/Recovery: An owner or operator shall keep records of disposal/recovery of all VOC-
containing materials.
501.4 Monthly VOC Leak Detection Inspection and Repair Records: The owner or operator shall
maintain monthly leak detection and repair records that document, at a minimum, the following:
a. Name of person conducting the leak detection inspection.
b. The date the inspection was conducted.
c. The equipment inspected.
d. Any leaks that were detected or, note if no leaks were detected.
e. If a leak was detected, then include all of the following information on the inspection record:
(1) The date the leak was detected.
(2) The date of the first attempt of repair.
(3) The results of the first attempt of repair.
(4) The date and results of subsequent repairs, if necessary.
(5) The results and date of the final repair.
501.5 Annual Operator Training Records Required by Section 403 of this Rule: The owner or
operator shall maintain a copy of the training program and shall include, at a minimum, the
following:
a. A list of employees trained and date trained; and
b. Training material used for training.
502 COMPLIANCE DETERMINATION – TEST METHODS INCORPORATED BY
REFERENCE: When more than one test method is permitted for a determination, an exceedance of the
limits established in this rule, as determined by any of the applicable test methods, constitutes a violation of
this rule. The following test methods are approved for use for the purpose of determining compliance with
this rule. The test methods are incorporated by reference in Appendix G of the Maricopa County Air
Pollution Control Regulations. Alternative test methods as approved by the Administrator or other EPA-
approved test methods may be used upon prior written approval from the Control Officer. When more than
one test method is permitted for the same determination, an exceedance under any method will constitute a
violation.
502.1 Measurement of VOC content, pursuant to the VOC-limits of subsections 301.1, 301.2, and 302.2,
and subsections 304.1 and 307.2c., shall be conducted and reported in accordance with EPA Test
Method 24 (40 CFR 60, Appendix A). Acetone content shall be determined within the context of
Method 24 by EPA Method 311 or other method acceptable to EPA. Multi-part coatings including
those with reactive diluent(s) shall be tested by Method 24 procedures.
502.1 Measurement of VOC Content: EPA TEST METHOD 24—DETERMINATION OF VOLATILE
MATTER CONTENT, WATER CONTENT, DENSITY, VOLUME SOLIDS, AND WEIGHT
SOLIDS OF SURFACE COATINGS (40 CFR 60, Appendix A-7) shall be used to determine the
VOC content and the solids content by weight of the coating materials.
502.2 Measurement of air pressure at the center of the spray gun tip air cap and air horns of a
conventional air-atomized spray gun (reference Section 302) shall be performed using a device in
proper working order supplied by the gun's manufacturer for performing such a measurement.
502.3 Measurement of mil thickness to determine compliance with single resin-layer finish parameters in
Section 227 of this rule and subsection 307.2c Section 103.2(c) of this rule shall be performed by

draw bar and calculations using the weight and area of the film and the density of the cured
coating solids, by a Tooke Inspection Gage according to the instructions of its manufacturer, or by
other means used for the purpose by a major coating manufacturer's laboratory or quality control.
APPENDIX A TO RULE 342
AN AVERAGING ALTERNATIVE
a. Purpose: The averaging provisions of this Appendix to Rule 342 allow the owner or operator of a furniture
coating facility, which meets eligibility requirements, increased options in choosing coating types. These
provisions expand the range of the allowable VOC contents of coatings while limiting overall VOC emissions
to amounts less than would be emitted at the VOC-content limits of subsection Section 301.1 of this rule.
b. Eligibility to Apply: The owner or operator of any furniture coating operation, reasonably capable of annually
emitting more than 25 tons (22.7 Mg) of VOC and having at least one of the following four statuses with
respect to VOC emissions, may apply to average:
(1) Has emitted more than 25 tons (21.7 22.7 Mg) of VOC in any year since 1989 and has a Maricopa County
Air Quality Permit or is under consideration for such permit by the Control Officer;
(2) Has in its permit a VOC-emissions limit of 50 tons (45.4 Mg) or more;
(3) Has applied for or received Title V status.
c. How to Apply: An applicant shall submit a request for eligibility to the Control Officer. This request shall
include a summary of the chief reasons for requesting eligibility for averaging.
(1) The Control Officer shall provide a brief questionnaire eliciting responses intended to reveal whether the
operator has sufficient understanding and preparation to successfully average. This questionnaire shall
require a sample of their intended recordkeeping format along with calculations containing the expected
amount and VOC-contents of coatings intended to be used in averaging.
(2) The Control Officer may request confirmation, correction, or clarification from the owner or operator for
responses to the questionnaire that are questionable; that appear unclear, erroneous, incomplete, or non-
pertinent, or for which there is contrary evidence.
(3) The owner or operator shall submit a correctly completed questionnaire, signed by a responsible officer of
the facility, no later than 14 calendar days prior to the first day of averaging.
(4) Control Officer approval of the completed questionnaire shall constitute an acceptance of application for
minor permit revision. The Control Officer may request additional information characteristically required
for minor revisions to the permits of wood furniture coaters as a class.
(5) Control Officer approval does not necessarily constitute satisfaction of all federal requirements nor preempt
the EPA Administrator’s asserting a right of approval.
d. Definitions of Terms used in an Averaging Regime, for the Purposes of the Provisions of this Appendix to
Rule 342:
(1) CERTIFIED PRODUCT DATA SHEET: A document provided by a coating supplier stating precisely
the maximum VOC content of a particular coating as supplied. The maximum VOC content of a particular
coating may be expressed as the VOC content by percent weight or VOC content Pounds per Gallon and
Solid Content by percent weight or percent Non-Volatile and Density; or for any of these described
expressions, equivalent information is acceptable.
(1) (2) CREDIT CONSUMING COATING (EXCEEDING COATING): In an averaging regime, coating with
average VOC content exceeding the neutral point for its particular coating type, such as topcoat, sealer, etc.
A credit consuming coating requires the use of credit generating coating(s) in order that the combination of
all coatings in use will not exceed the limit set by the left side of the averaging formula.
(2) (3) CREDIT CONSUMING PIECE/EXCEEDING PIECE: In an averaging regime, a piece of furniture
which is a member of a model-line of furniture receiving such a high proportion of credit-consuming
coating that when the VOC contents and coating quantities received by the model-line, are entered into an

averaging formula of Section i., the sum yielded by the right side of the formula is consistently larger than
the sum yielded by the left side of the formula.
(3) (4) CREDIT GENERATING COATING: A coating which has VOC content well below the neutral point
and, thus, is used in an averaging regime to create surplus VOC credit(s) to offset the excess emissions of
particular credit consuming coating(s).
(4) (5) CREDIT GENERATING PIECE: In an averaging regime, a piece of furniture which is a member of a
model-line of furniture receiving so much credit generating coating that when the VOC contents and
coating quantities, received by the model-line, are entered into an averaging formula, the sum yielded by
the right side of the formula is consistently less than the sum yielded by the left side of the formula.
(5) (6) NEUTRAL POINT: The particular number representing the VOC content of a particular coating type
having the mathematical property that if it is included in an averaging formula it has no effect on the
numerical results of the formula, regardless of how much of the coating is used. The neutral point VOC
content for each affected coating-type is as follows:
Using Formula 1:
Topcoat neutral point - 0.72 kg VOC/kg pound VOC per pound coating solids (0.72 kg VOC/kg solids).
(Stains, sealers, etc. do not appear in Formula 1)
Using Formula 2:
The neutral point VOC content for each of the 5 types of coating in Formula 2 is as follows:
Table 342-3 Formula 2 Neutral Point VOC Content of Coating
Coating Type VOC Content Neutral Point VOC Content Neutral Point
Topcoat 1.62 lb VOC/lb solids 1.62 kg VOC/kg solids
Sealer coat 1.71 lb VOC/lb solids 1.71 kg VOC/kg solids
Washcoat 8.1 lb VOC/lb solids 8.1 kg VOC/kg solids
Basecoat 1.08 lb VOC/lb solids 1.08 kg VOC/kg solids
Stain 5.942 lb VOC/gallon 0.712 kg VOC/liter
The neutral point VOC content for each of the 5 types of coating in Formula 2 is as follows:
Topcoat - 1.62 kg VOC/kg solids; sealer coat - 1.71; washcoat - 8.1; basecoat - 1.08
The neutral point for stains is expressed in kilograms VOC per liter of coating - 0.712 kg VOC/liter
e. Basic Requirements for all Averaging Regimes:
(1) Entire Workdays Working Days: Averaging regimes must be in place for no less than an entire 24 hour
period and at all times during such 24-hour period. Normally, a workday working day will be the calendar
day in which work commences. However, an owner or operator may designate in writing
a workday working day schedule beginning and ending at a specific time between 12 midnight and 4:30
AM if the last shift normally ends between midnight and 4:30 AM, unless the Control Officer issues
written disapproval. The times of the averaging workday working day may be changed if written
notification has been given the Control Officer at least five workdays working days before the start of the
intended new schedule, and no communication of disapproval has been issued within this time by the
Control Officer.
(2) Averaging Applies Plant-Wide: An averaging regime applies throughout a facility to all production
furniture coating occurring during all 24 hours of a workday working day for which an averaging regime is
declared.
(3) No Exemption for Single Resin-Layer Finishes or Acid-Cured, Alkyd Amino Coatings:
(a) In averaging regimes using Formula 2, for surfaces which receive in total only one application of film
building coating, the neutral point for that coating shall be the same as that for a sealer, 1.71 lb VOC/lb

solids kg VOC/kg solids (1.71 kg VOC/kg solids), and it shall be totaled with sealers in the averaging
formula.
(b) Acid-cured, alkyd amino coatings, with or without vinyl chemistry, shall have the same neutral points
in Formula 2 as do other sealers (1.71 lb VOC/lb solids or 1.71 kg VOC/kg solids) and topcoats (1.62
lb VOC/lb solids or 1.62 kg VOC/kg solids) (1.71 and 1.62, respectively) and shall be totaled in with
the other sealers and topcoats in Formula 2.
(4) Identifying Credit Consuming Models: Each furniture/finish model must be identified which on average
does not by itself (i.e., by the combination of all coatings it receives) meet the applicable averaging formula
(and must be offset by models whose coatings generate VOC credits). The model name and/or code of each
credit consuming model must be identified in a permanent record for that purpose, along with a designation
indicating that the model produces excess emissions. This designation can be the average grams of VOC
above the formula limit, the maximum grams above the limit, number of exceeding grams at the first
standard deviation, relative risk, or other term(s) created by the owner or operator that fulfill this purpose
for the facility.
(5) Exemption for Physically Separated Lines:
(a) At the Control Officer’s discretion, an exemption from the requirement that the entire facility
participate when an averaging regime is in effect can be granted for an additional coating line if: Such
a coating line is both physically separate from the operations involving averaging and all monitoring,
recordkeeping, and coating equipment including coating reservoirs are kept separate from the
monitoring, recordkeeping and coating equipment participating in an averaging regime. The burden of
demonstration is on the owner or operator that there is no significant risk of confounding enforcement,
monitoring, recordkeeping, and equipment activities between the lines.
(b) Dual Averaging Regimes: A facility which has received such a subsection e.(5)(a) exemption has the
option of running each separated line using an averaging regime. However, all requirements of this
rule must be complied with by each separated line.
(6) Declaration of Averaging: On any working day of a Control Officer presence at a facility permitted to
average, the owner or operator shall correctly announce without delay whether an averaging regime is
currently in effect, and on an averaging working day shall also forthwith supply a listing of each coating
participating in the averaging formula, along with the VOC content and the coating category of each.
f. Recordkeeping and Monitoring: In addition to the requirements of Section 501 of this rule, an owner or
operator shall do the following:
(1) Daily List the Components: Prior to applying any coating on an averaging working day, a list shall be
made of each coating name/code to be used that working day in the averaging formula and its expected
VOC content as applied. This list shall be available to the Control Officer without delay.
(2) Daily calculation Deadline: After each working day using averaging, an owner or operator shall determine
the results of averaging for that completed production working day by midday on the
next workday working day. These results shall be put into hardcopy in the same format that the owner or
operator used in the approved application questionnaire. Some other format may be used if the Control
Officer has given the format approval before beginning averaging.
(3) Log in: An owner or operator shall arrange and keep the hardcopy results of each working day’s averaging
in a form that allows the results of each averaging working day within the 13 months prior to a Control
Officer visit to be accessed by the Control Officer without delay.
(4) Content of Weekly Summary of Production-Coating: By the end of the first shift of the workweek,
totals for the workweek just completed shall be compiled as follows:
(a) For each model and color, the total number of furniture pieces coated;
(b) The name and quantity applied for each stain, washcoat, basecoat, sealer, topcoat, and diluent
recorded. The quantity of stain shall be expressed in liters; the quantity of the other coatings expressed
in kilograms;

(c) The VOC content for each such coating and diluent, expressed in lb VOC/lb solids or kg VOC/kg
solids; and the non-precursor organic compound (NP) content of each, expressed either in kg NP/kg
solids or kg NP/kg coating-including-NP shall be recorded, except that the VOC content of each stain
shall be expressed in kg VOC per liter of coating, including any water or non-precursors.
(d) Monthly Totals for Non-Averaged Coatings: For coatings that do not participate in the averaging
formulas, the total kilograms used shall be updated monthly. Coatings of the same type may be totaled
together under a single VOC-content value if their VOC contents are within ± 2% of that value.
(5) Handling Unavoidable Data Loss and Data Processing Equipment Malfunctions: An owner or
operator shall put an accounting system in continual effect that allows the retrieval or reconstruction of
data. When data required by this rule is lost, the Control Officer shall be notified forthwith and such data
shall be reconstructed and due calculations completed within two facility workdays working days. The
Control Officer may request that a hardcopy of the retrieved information be provided him/her by the same
clock time, two workdays working days hence.
(6) Report Submittal Schedule:
(a) Semi-Annual Reports: An owner or operator shall submit a summary of the records, including all
exceedances, by July 20 for the first half of the year and by January 20 of the following year for the
second half. Included shall be certified product data sheets for coatings whose VOC content is
determined by the supplier and not directly by the facility, and a statement that the coatings for which
certified product data sheets are submitted were the coatings actually used. All the foregoing shall be
certified to and signed by a responsible official of the facility.
(b) Initial Compliance Report: Within 60 days after the third working day ever of averaging, an owner
or operator shall submit a report to the Control Officer containing all the elements required by
subsection f.(6)(a) above.
g. Test Procedures and Requirements:
(1) An owner or operator shall cause to be performed EPA Test Method 24 - Determination of Volatile Matter
Content, Water Content, Density, Volume Solids, and Weight Solids of Surface Coatings, tests on a
sample of each coating intended to be used in an averaging regime, prior to using such coating in any
averaging regime. These samples shall be taken at three levels of dilution: prior to adding any diluent; with
the minimum weight of VOC-containing solvent/diluent typically used; and with the maximum weight
of VOC-containing solvent/diluent expected ever to be needed.
(2) An acetone determination shall be made in conjunction with Method 24 using EPA Test Method 311 -
Analysis of Hazardous Air Pollutant Compounds in Paints and Coatings by Direct Injection into a Gas
Chromatograph; or other method approved by EPA at the three dilution levels stipulated in subsection
g.(1).
(3) The Status of Certified Product Data Sheets: After the initial Method 24 tests pursuant to subsection
g.(1), an owner or operator may substitute the specific certified product data sheet, based on Method 24, for
any coating for any of the three levels of dilution stipulated in subsection g.(1), in lieu of directly
overseeing the Method 24 tests.
(a) However, a certified product data sheet is not valid and shall not be submitted if it is neither for a
dilution level in subsection g.(1) nor for the actual dilution level of a coating as applied during
averaging.
(b) When the results of a Method 24 test, performed pursuant to a Control Officer initiative or directive,
differ from the certified product data sheet, the Control Officer may require an owner or operator to
have Method 24 tests conducted at a testing facility agreed to by the Control Officer and may require
that the results of such tests be the values used in calculating averages.
h. Sanctions:
(1) If an exceedance of the limits of an averaging formula is determined to be in violation of this rule, at least
two violations may be charged: at least one violation for exceeding the limits in subsection 301.1 Section
301.1 and a separate violation for exceeding the limit determined by the averaging formula in Section i. of

this Appendix. Unless the Control Officer chooses otherwise, the number of violations issued for an
exceedance of an averaging limit shall be one greater than the number of exceeding coatings participating
in the averaging formula. Each working day the average is exceeded will be counted as a separate incident.
(2) Continuance: The Control Officer may disallow an owner or operator the continuance of averaging at a
facility which has failed to comply with one or more provisions of this Appendix on three
separate working days in any period of 12 consecutive months, or which has been found guilty of a major
violation of such provisions, except as prohibited by other rule or statute.
i. Two Averaging Formulas: The following are the two mathematical formulas from which one may be chosen
to be used for an averaging regime.
(1) If topcoats consistently average less than 0.72 kg VOC per kg solids on a mass solid basis, an owner or
operator may use Formula 1.
𝑛𝑛 𝑛𝑛
෍0.72(𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑖𝑖) ≥෍𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑖𝑖(𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑖𝑖) 𝐅𝐅𝐅𝐅𝐅𝐅𝐅𝐅𝐅𝐅𝐅𝐅𝐅𝐅 𝟏𝟏
𝑖𝑖=1 𝑖𝑖=1
(2) For other coating systems using averaging, Formula 2 shall be used.
𝑛𝑛
෍1.62(𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑖𝑖) + 1.71(𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑖𝑖) + 8.1(𝑊𝑊𝑊𝑊𝑖𝑖) + 1.08(𝐵𝐵𝐵𝐵𝑖𝑖) + 0.712(𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑖𝑖) ≥
𝑛𝑛 𝑖𝑖=1
෍𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑖𝑖(𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑖𝑖) + 𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑖𝑖(𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑖𝑖) + 𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝑊𝑊𝑊𝑊𝑖𝑖(𝑊𝑊𝑊𝑊𝑖𝑖) + 𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐵𝐵𝐵𝐵𝑖𝑖(𝐵𝐵𝐵𝐵𝑖𝑖) + 𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑖𝑖(𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑖𝑖) 𝐅𝐅𝐅𝐅𝐅𝐅𝐅𝐅𝐅𝐅𝐅𝐅𝐅𝐅 𝟐𝟐
𝑖𝑖=1
where:
N = number of finishing materials participating in averaging;
TCi = kilograms of solids of topcoat i used;
SEi = kilograms of solids of sealer i used;
WCi = kilograms of solids of washcoat i used;
BCi = kilograms of solids of basecoat i used;
STi = liters of stain i used (water and any non-precursor content are not subtracted);
ERTC i = VOC content of topcoat i in kg VOC/kg solids, as applied;
ERSE i = VOC content of sealer i in kg VOC/kg solids, as applied;
ERWC i = VOC content of washcoat i in kg VOC/kg solids, as applied;
ERBC i = VOC content of basecoat i in kg VOC/kg solids, as applied; and
ERST i = VOC content of stain i in kg VOC/liter, as applied.
j. Pre-RACT Coating use is Limited: If a coating was used before 1993, and is still used for the same purposes,
and it had a VOC content then which is lower than the neutral point for that coating type, then that coating may
only be used in the averaging equation if the coating is now lower in VOC than before 1993. If that coating is
used in averaging, the left side of the averaging formula must reflect the pre-RACT VOC content and not the
current RACT neutral point for that type of coating. To effect this, additional mathematical terms must be
added, one on the left and one on the right side of the formula. For example, if one can prove one used a high
solids topcoat at 1.5 kg VOC/kg solids before 1993 (the year regulation negotiations began) and now thin the
same product less so that it is consistently less than 1.5 kg/kg, one can enter it as a separate term. It appears in
the formula below as “1.5(TU)” where “TU” stands for the total kilograms of solids of this unique topcoat used
during an averaging working day. “TU” appears on both sides of the inequality sign. ERu is the actual VOC
content that was in this unique topcoat on a particular averaging working day. Along with this, the meaning of
the term (TCi) becomes slightly altered to mean the total topcoat solids used of every other topcoat beside the
unique topcoat “U”:

𝑛𝑛
෍1.62(𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑖𝑖) + 1.5(𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇) + 1.71(𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑖𝑖) + 8.1(𝑊𝑊𝑊𝑊𝑖𝑖) + 1.08(𝐵𝐵𝐵𝐵𝑖𝑖) + 0.712(𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑖𝑖) ≥
𝑖𝑖=1
𝑛𝑛
෍𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑖𝑖(𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑖𝑖) + 𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝑈𝑈(𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇) + 𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑖𝑖(𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑖𝑖) + 𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝑊𝑊𝑊𝑊𝑖𝑖(𝑊𝑊𝑊𝑊𝑖𝑖) + 𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐵𝐵𝐵𝐵𝑖𝑖(𝐵𝐵𝐵𝐵𝑖𝑖) + 𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑖𝑖(𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑖𝑖)
𝑖𝑖=1
Similarly, any other unique coatings that meet such requirements and are used in averaging must each have its
own set of two terms inserted into the averaging formula. Moreover, once a pre-RACT coating is used in
averaging, the term for its VOC content must stay in the equation as long as that pre-RACT coating is used,
even if one later needs to raise the VOC content of the pre-RACT coating to a level above its historical VOC
content.
APPENDIX B – A SHORT-FORM OPTION
a. Applicability: This Appendix B to Rule 342 only applies to operators of facilities which have a permit or
permit modification limiting VOC emissions from all wood furniture and millwork coating to less than 10
tons (9.1 Mg), and the permit or Control Officer states in writing that this Appendix B applies. For those
facilities for which this Appendix B does apply, no provisions within Sections 301 through 501, inclusive, shall
be used to substitute for provisions in this Appendix B. Facilities subject to this Appendix B are also subject to
all of Sections 100, 200, and 502.
b. Definitions: For the purposes of this Appendix B, the following definition shall apply:
(1) MINUS EXEMPT MATERIALS (MINUS EXEMPTS): Means the same as “less water and non-
precursor organic compounds” in specifying VOC content.
c. VOC Limits for Topcoats and Sealers
(1) The Principal VOC Limits: Meet either the lbs VOC/lb solids limit or the lbs VOC/gal, minus exempts,
limit: All sealers and topcoats: 2 lbs VOC/lb solids (2 kg VOC/kg solids) or 5.45 lb VOC/gal (653 g/l).
(2) VOC Tradeoff Options: These 2 options each require special conditions.
(a) Low VOC topcoat with Higher VOC Sealer:
Low VOC topcoat: 0.8 lb VOC/lb solids (0.8 kg VOC/kg solids) or 3.83 lb/gal (455 g/l) limit for
topcoat.
Higher VOC sealer: no VOC limit for sealer under such topcoat.
(b) One-Step Finish:
Higher VOC combination sealer and topcoat: 3 lb VOC/lb solids (3 kg VOC/kg solids) or 6.0 lb/gal
limit (719 g/l).
The 2 Conditions:
I. A single wet application of either sealer or topcoat (not both)
II. Thickness of the dry finish cannot exceed 3 dry mils, as determined by the test method
in subsection Section 502.3 of this rule.
d. Spray Method Requirements:
(1) Have Guns with Higher Transfer: If you spray coating having over 1 lb VOC/lb solids (1 kg VOC/kg
solids) you must use and have in evidence for an inspector at least one of the following onsite:
 Low pressure gun with less than 12 psig at tip air cap. Examples: pure HVLP gun; a turbine gun.
 An HVLP gun or a turbine gun with 10 psig or less at air cap.
 Airless; includes air-assisted airless.
 An electrostatic system.

(2) Green Tag Option: Restriction on conventional guns and other restricted use guns: Conventional Spray
Gun Restriction:
(a) Green Tag Requirements: A conventional air-atomized or other restricted use gun shall have a durable
and visible green tag, sticker, or painted emblem, no less than 4 square inches in area on the gun or
within 3 ft of the gun on the gun’s hose, or the facility is in violation. But, such a tag is not required at
a facility having and using only coatings which contain less than 1 lb VOC/lb solids as applied.
Coatings which have less than 4.30 lb VOC/gal (515 g/l) minus exempt materials also meet this
requirement.
(b) Prohibition: No coating over 1 lb VOC/lb solids (1 kg VOC/kg solids) may be applied with a
conventional air-atomized or other restricted use gun unless the coating meets the requirements of
Section 103.2.e of this rule. This prohibition includes, but is not limited to, traditional lacquers,
washcoats, and low-solids stains. (“Conventional air-atomized gun” is defined in Section 208.
“Restricted use gun” is defined in Section 225.)
(3) Exemptions from VOC and Spray-Method Limits: Prepackaged aerosol spray in cans under 22 fl.
oz. (0.66 liter), faux and metal-leaf finish are exempt from Appendix B’s subsections c.(1) and (2) and d.(1)
and (2) as is any refinishing operation necessary for preservation, to return furniture to original condition,
to replace missing furniture items to complete a matching set, or to produce custom replica furniture. But
nothing exempted by the previous sentence is exempt from inventory of VOC emissions or from other
provisions of this Appendix B.
e. Housekeeping Functions:
(1) Keep Coatings VOC-Containing Materials, Cleaners, & Waste-Materials Covered: Coatings and
cleaners not in use, as well as waste coatings, cleaning materials including solvent-dipped rags, and solvent
used to clean spray equipment must be collected into a closed container or a container which is closed
immediately after receiving such material. An owner or operator shall cover and keep covered each VOC-
containing material intended for the day’s production, which is not currently in use. An owner or operator
shall store VOC-containing finishing and cleaning materials in closed containers. An owner or operator
shall store all VOC-containing materials intended for disposal, including, but not limited to, rags, waste
coatings, waste solvents and their residues, in closed containers, which shall remain covered except when
contents are being added or removed.
(2) Booth Cleaning: If booth/components other than metal filters are cleaned with solvent, no solvent which is
more than 3.8 lb/VOC per gallon (455 g/l) shall be used. However, up to 1 gallon of solvent over 3.8 lb
VOC/gal may be used for cleaning a booth as part of replacing coating on the booth. An owner or operator
shall not clean spray booth components using a VOC-containing solvent containing more than eight percent
(8.0%) by weight of VOC, including water and non-precursor compounds, except for: conveyors;
continuous coaters and their enclosures; and metal filters and while refurbishing spray booths. If the
strippable booth coating is being replaced, an owner or operator shall not use more than 1.0 gallon (3.8
liters) VOC-containing solvent per booth to clean the spray booth.
f. Records: Keep a list of all VOC-containing material with the name and amount of VOC in each: Express VOC
content either as lb/lb lb VOC/lb solids (kg VOC/kg solids) or lb/gal lb VOC/gal (g VOC/l). For topcoat and
sealer contents which are expressed in lb VOC/gal, this must be minus water and non-precursors.
(1) If you ever do your own Reducing or Thinning of a Sealer or Topcoat:
Keep a list of the maximum VOC content of any material after you thin it or add any additives at your
facility.
(2) Keep Receipts for 5 Years of the amount received for each VOC-containing material and of the amount of
all VOC-containing waste materials sent for recycling or hazardous waste collection.
(3) What to Record and How often: Record the amount in the following 4 categories, (a) to (d), noting either
the amount “used” or the amount “received” since your last records update:
(a) All coatings including topcoats, sealers, stains, etc., including all parts, catalysts, activators, additives,
hardeners; (not reducers). If you use conventional guns at all, total separately the coatings having less
than 1 lb VOC/lb solids;

(b) All VOC-containing reducers and diluents to be used for reducing or diluting coatings (not cleaning);
(c) All VOC-containing solvents, strippers, thinners, and VOC-containing materials used for cleaning and
cleanup (not reducing); and
(d) All other VOC-containing materials connected with wood coating. Omit janitorial and building
maintenance.
(e) How often to Update your Records: Update the above items in (a), (b), (c), and (d) weekly if your
total monthly use of all coatings and diluents [(a) + (b)] is 250 gallons (946 liters) or more. Otherwise,
update monthly. You may record just once a year those types of materials of which you use less than
15 gallons (57 l) of.
Example: I use 5 kinds of graining ink. Added all together, I use 14 gallons of all graining ink
combined: I only have to update my graining inks once a year.
APPENDIX C TO RULE 342
ALTERNATIVE COMPLIANCE WITH SECTION 301 VOC LIMITS AND/OR SECTION 302 SPRAY-
METHOD RESTRICTIONS BY USING AN EMISSIONS CONTROL DEVICE
a. Eligibility: A person is allowed to meet the VOC limits of either or both subsections 301.1 and 301.2 Sections
301.1 and 301.2 of this rule by using an ECS which reduces VOC emissions overall, including capture and
processing, by at least 81 percent by weight. Such an ECS may also be used to comply with subsection
302.2 Section 302.2 of this rule spray method provisions.
b. Operation and Maintenance (O&M) Plan Required for ECS:
(1) The owner or operator of an emission control system (ECS) used to meet the requirements of Section 301
of this rule shall provide the Control Officer with an Operation and Maintenance (O&M) Plan. This O&M
Plan shall specify key system operating parameters, such as temperatures, pressures and/or flow rates,
necessary to determine compliance with this rule, and describe in detail procedures and their frequency of
implementation needed to maintain the ECS.
(2) The Control Officer's written approval of the O&M Plan is required. The owner or operator shall
consistently implement all provisions of the O&M Plan.
(3) Changes in Frequency: Changes involving reduction in the frequency or extent of procedures or
parameters in a Control Officer-approved O&M Plan shall have the written consent of the Control Officer
prior to being implemented.
(4) Other Changes: An updated O&M Plan must be submitted to the Control Officer for review within 10 ten
(10) days of any changes not involving reduction in frequency or extent of procedures or parameters of an
approved O&M Plan. Within five (5) working days of a written disapproval of such changes, either the
original O&M Plan shall be reinstituted or an alternative plan, negotiated with the affected facility and
approved in writing by the Control Officer, shall be instituted.
c. Providing and Maintaining ECS Monitoring Devices: Any person operating an emission control system
(ECS) pursuant to subsection 301.3 Section 301.3 of this rule shall install, maintain, and calibrate monitoring
devices described in the O&M Plan submitted to the Control Officer pursuant to subsection b. of this appendix.
The monitoring devices shall measure temperatures, pressures, rates of flow, or other operating conditions
necessary to determine if air pollution control equipment is functioning properly.
(1) ECS Operation and Maintenance Records: On each working day that an ECS is used to comply with
Section 301 of this rule, an owner or operator shall make a permanent record of the operating parameters of
the key systems described in the O&M Plan. For each working day or period in which the O&M Plan
requires that maintenance be performed, a permanent record shall be made of the maintenance actions
taken, within 24 hours of maintenance completion. An explanation shall be entered for scheduled
maintenance that is not performed during the period designated in the O&M Plan.
(2) Other Records Required when Complying Via ECS: An owner or operator choosing to meet the
requirements of Section 301 through the use of an ECS shall maintain, in addition to the monthly records
required by subsection 501.2 Section 501.2 of this rule:

(a) Daily documentation showing the VOC content of the finishing material, as applied, in pounds
VOC/pound solids when VOC-containing solvent or other VOC is added to the finishing material
before application.
(b) Daily records showing the amount of coating, the amount of catalyst/hardener, and the amount
of VOC-containing solvent, reducer, and/or diluent used.
d. Compliance Schedule for ECS: An owner or operator of a wood furniture coating facility shall have such
facility in compliance per the following schedule. Total VOC emissions is are the total facility-wide VOC from
all wood coating operations and associated cleaning processes. It includes millwork coating. that are vented to
the ECS.
(1) Sources Emitting 50 TPY: The owner or operator of a wood furniture coating facility shall be in full Full
compliance with all applicable requirements of this rule shall be by November 15, 1996, if such facility has
applied for or received a Title V permit, its permit has a VOC-emissions limit of 50 tons (45.35 Mg) or
more, or which has had an aggregate VOC emission to atmosphere after December 31, 1989, of 50.0 tons
(45.35 Mg) or more in any calendar year or 300 pounds (136 kg) or more in any working day. In addition,
an owner or operator shall provide the Control Officer with:
(a) Both proof of a binding contract for an ECS and a compliance plan by June 3, 1996, listing dates of
completion of increments of progress toward meeting the requirements of subsection 301.3 Section
301.2 of this rule.
(b) An O&M Plan for the ECS by November 15, 1996.
(2) Other Sources: AThe owner or operator of a wood furniture coating facility shall be in compliance with
Section 301 and Section 302 of this rule by November 15, 1996 and with Section 301 by January 15, 1997,
if itsthe total VOC in each of the years 1990 through 1995 of is less than 300 pounds (136 kg) in
any working day and 50.0 tons (45.35 Mg) in any calendar year. In addition, the owner or operator shall
provide the Control Officer with:
(a) Both proof of a binding contract for an ECS and a compliance plan by June 3, 1996, listing the dates of
completing the increments of progress toward meeting the requirements of the subsection
301.3 Section 301.3 of this rule; and
(b) An O&M Plan for the ECS by January 2, 1997.
e. Test Methods for an ECS
(1) Control efficiency of an emission control device used to meet the requirements of Section 301 shall be
determined according to EPA Reference Test Method 25 - Determination of Total Gaseous Nonmethane
Organic Emissions as Carbon or an applicable submethod of Method 25 (Title 40, CFR Part 60, Appendix
A).
(2) EPA Test Method 18- Measurement of Gaseous Organic Compound Emissions by Gas Chromatography
shall be used if specified by the Control Officer when a non-precursor organic compound is present in the
input of a control device used to meet the requirement of Section 301 of this rule.
(3) Capture efficiency of an emission control device used to meet the requirements of Section 301 shall be
determined by mass balance in combination with ventilation/draft rate determinations done in accordance
with subsection e.(4), following, or according to "Guidelines for Determining Capture Efficiency" January
9, 1995, Candace Sorrell, Source Characterization Group A, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards,
US EPA. This EPA document is available at the Maricopa County Air Quality Department, 1001 N.
Central Ave., Phoenix, Arizona, 85004.
(4) Ventilation/draft rates of an emission control device used to meet the requirements of Section 301 of this
rule shall be determined by one or more of the following EPA Test Methods: 2, 2A, 2C, or 2D.
a. EPA Test Method 2 - Determination of Stack Gas Velocity and Volumetric Flow Rate (Type S Pitot
Tube)
b. EPA Test Method 2A - Direct Measurement of Gas Volume Through Pipes and Small Ducts

c. EPA Test Method 2C - Determination of Gas Velocity and Volumetric Flow Rate in Small Stacks or
Ducts (Standard Pitot Tube)
d. EPA Test Method 2D - Measurement of Gas Volume Flow Rates in Small Pipes and Ducts

Return to list of attachments
MARICOPA COUNTY BOARD OF HEALTH MEETING MINUTES
Monday, April 25, 2016
301 W. Jefferson Street, 10th Floor
Phoenix, Arizona 85003
Board of Supervisors Conference Room
President Kip Steill called the meeting to order at 3:09 p.m.
ROLL CALL:
Members Present: Members Excused:
Don Cassano Scott Somers
Nedra Halley Francisca Montoya
Andrew Kunasek
Debra Baldauff
Kip Steill
Don Hughes
Robert MacMillan
Michael Mills, M.D. (via phone)
Ex-Officio: Bob England, M.D.
CALL TO THE PUBLIC:
Mr. Kip Steill announced it was time for a call to the public and requested public comment forms
for those who wanted to speak or who wanted to address any action items.
Supervisor Kunasek introduced the newest Board of Health member, Mr. MacMillan.
DISCUSSION/ACTION ITEMS
1. Election of Board of Health Vice President:
Mr. Don Hughes was nominated as Vice President of the Board of Health. A motion was made by
Mr. Don Cassano and seconded by Ms. Nedra Halley and all were in favor. The motion passed
unanimously.
2. Approval of Minutes: President Steill asked for a motion to approve the minutes from the BOH
Meeting held on January 25, 2016. Motion was made by Ms. Nedra Halley to approve the BOH
minutes as presented. Motion was seconded by Mr. Don Cassano and the motion passed
unanimously.
3. Approval of Public Health FY 17 OMB Budget Recommendation Mr. Scot Pitcairn
The Board of Health Finance Committee recommended that the Board of Health approve Public
Health’s FY 17 OMB Budget Recommendation. Mr. Pitcairn was available to answer any questions
that the Board of Health had. Motion was made by Mr. Don Hughes to approve Public Health’s FY
17 OMB budget recommendation. Motion was seconded by Mr. Don Cassano and the motion
passed unanimously.
4. Approval of Environmental Services FY 17 OMB Budget Recommendation Ms. Diane Cabanillas
The Board of Health Finance Committee recommended that the Board of Health approve
Environmental Services’ FY 17 OMB Budget Recommendation. Ms. Cabanillas was available to
answer any questions that the Board of Health had. Motion was made by Mr. Don Hughes to
1

approve Environmental Services FY 17 OMB budget recommendation. Motion was seconded by Mr.
Halley and the motion passed unanimously.
5. Approval of the initiation of regulatory change for the ozone-related Mr. Philip A. McNeely
rulemakings
The rules being revised regarding ozone are the following:
Rule 241: Minor New Source Review
Rule 322: Power Plant Operations
Rule 323: Fuel Burning Equipment from Industrial/Commercial/Institutional Sources
Rule 324: Stationary Internal Combustion (IC) Engines
Rule 336: Surface Coating Operations
Rule 342: Coating Wood Furniture and Fixtures
Rule 350: Storage of Organic Liquids at Bulk Plants and Terminals
Rule 351: Loading of Organic Liquids
Rule 352: Gasoline Delivery Vessel Testing and Use
Rule 353: Gasoline In Stationary Dispensing Tanks
These rules are being closed for public comment and will be published May 13th. If there is no
further comment, the rules will go to the Board of Supervisors for a hearing. These rules are in
regards to non-attainment for the ozone standards. These rules are due to the EPA January 1, 2017
and have gone through the EROP/stakeholder meeting process. Every facility that has a permit will
receive information when rule changes are occurring via email. For more information on the
regulatory process: http://www.maricopa.gov/regulations/default.aspx
Motion was made by Mr. Don Cassano to approve the initiation of regulatory change for the
ozone-related rulemakings. Motion was seconded by Ms. Nedra Halley and the motion passed
unanimously.
6. Fee Waiver Applications Mr. Ken Conklin
Mr. Ken Conklin presented thirty-two (32) fee waivers for review and consideration of approval. A
summary sheet document was provided.
Motion to approve the 32 Fee Waiver applications was made by Ms. Nedra Halley, seconded by
Mr. Don Cassano and all were in favor. Motion passed unanimously.
Discussion Items:
1. Public Health Report: Dr. Bob England
i. Human Resources
ii. Communication
iii. Infrastructure
iv. Strategic Planning
v. Programs
vi. Disease Update
vii. Future Topics
Dr. Bob provided the Board of Health with the updated Public Health org chart. The re-org has
aligned MCDPH into programmatic divisions. Previously, MCDPH was organized by funding stream.
Dr. Bob briefed the board on funding cuts that the department is receiving, including a $300,000
cut to WIC and $230,000 cut to the Office of Preparedness and Response (CDC is pulling some
money back for the Zika response). WIC is struggling to meet a target number of clients but each
time the program doesn’t meet the target, the number of target clients and funding is decreased.
The reason for difficulties with reaching the target number of client is that client encounter has
2

become increasingly more complex. The Office of Vital Records is moving their St. Mary’s Food
Bank location to a location near the 1-17 and Dunlap. MCDPH is no longer tracking returning
travelers from ebola stricken countries. Arizona has experienced the highest level of severity in the
country for flu for hospitalization and death rates. CDC is gathering data but there may not be
enough lab evidence to determine a cause. Zika virus is another of the flaviviruses that is associated
with significant neurological defects in infants whose mothers were infected with the virus in the
first two trimesters of pregnancy. The primary vector is Aedes Aegypti mosquitos. In Maricopa
County, there is no endemic spread of zika; only one travel associated case. The strategy when
there is a travel associated case is to have the individual stay inside, wear repellant, and when
necessary, have Environmental Services do traps and remediation depending on consent. There is
concern regarding the process and timeline it would take to enter private property if necessary to
spray for this type of mosquito. The Surgeon General will be visiting Arizona in May to do a tour on
opioid use. The NACCHO Annual meeting will be July 19 – 21 in Phoenix.
ANNOUNCEMENTS AND CURRENT EVENTS
 Next meeting is July 25, 2016
ADJOURNMENT: There being no further business, motion to adjourn the meeting was made by Mr.
Don Cassano, seconded by Ms. Halley and motion was passed unanimously. The meeting was
adjourned at 4:27 p.m.
3

Return to list of attachments

Return to list of attachments
Executive Summary
of the Report to the Board of Supervisors
Prepared by the Maricopa County Air Quality Department
Board Hearing Date: November 2, 2016
Case #/Title: AQ-2015-008-Rule 350 (Storage Of Organic Liquids At Bulk Plants And
Bulk Terminals)
Agenda Item:
Supervisor Districts: All Districts
The Maricopa County Air Quality Department (department) complied with all statutory and county policies
throughout this rulemaking process. Per the Enhanced Regulatory Outreach Program (EROP) Policy: “In addition
to the required staff report, an executive summary of the report including an overview of stakeholder input and
staff responses will be provided to the Board of Supervisors at least one week prior to any Board of Supervisors’
public hearing.”
Overview Of The Report To The Board Of Supervisors:
The department is requesting the Board of Supervisors to approve amendments to Maricopa County Air Pollution
Control Regulations regarding Rule 350 (Storage and Loading of Gasoline at Bulk Plants and Bulk Terminals)
and approve submitting the amended rules as a revision to the (Arizona) State Implementation Plan (SIP).
The purpose of this rulemaking is to separate the organic liquids (non-gasoline) from the gasoline requirements.
The organic liquid (non-gasoline) transfer requirements are included in amended Rule 350 (Storage Of Organic
Liquids At Bulk Plants And Bulk Terminals). The gasoline storage requirements currently in Rule 350 are being
consolidated into Rule 351. These rule revisions update and clarify the County regulatory requirements and
authority for both the organic liquid (non-gasoline) industry and the gasoline industry. In addition, the revisions to
Rule 350 address the requirements of the SIP for “moderate” nonattainment for the 2008 eight-hour ozone
national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS). The proposed amendments in Rule 350 include Reasonably
Available Control Technology (RACT) for volatile organic compounds (VOCs).
Overview Of Stakeholder Input And Staff Responses:
Three Stakeholder Workshops were held: June 29, 2015, September 14, 2015, and February 22, 2016.
Stakeholders expressed concerns that the draft rule would include any organic liquid stored at any site. The rule
title was revised. The purpose and applicability of the proposed rule were revised to clarify the draft rule was
applicable to the storage and transfer of organic liquids at a distribution facility and not at a facility that is the end
user of the organic liquid. The draft rule does not apply to the storage and transfer of organic liquids at a facility
that does not distribute the organic liquid to be “consumed by other parties.” (Rule 350 definition of “Organic
Liquid Distribution Facility”). In addition, questions were raise regarding the following:
• Definitions and how they pertain to the gasoline industry
• The applicability of the proposed rule to storage containers used for organic liquids
• Requirements for organic liquid storage tanks
A 30-day comment period was held May-June 2016. During the 30-day comment period, the department received
written comments from KinderMorgan/SFPP. Their comments were clarifying in nature; they suggested re-
wording some of the section headings regarding organic liquid stationary storage tank requirements. The
department addressed all of the comments; responses have been incorporated into the draft rule and are explained
in the Preamble of the Draft Notice of Final Rulemaking.

Return to list of attachments
Report to the Board of Supervisors
Prepared by the Maricopa County Air Quality Department
Board of Health Meeting Date: April 25, 2016
Board Hearing Date: November 2, 2016
Case #/Title: AQ-2015-008-Rule 350 (Storage of Organic Liquids at Bulk Plants and
Bulk Terminals)
Agenda Item:
Supervisor Districts: All Districts
Applicant: Staff
Request: Approve amendments to Maricopa County Air Pollution Control
Regulations regarding Rule 350 (Storage and Loading of Gasoline at
Bulk Plants and Bulk Terminals) and approve submitting the amended
rule as a revision to the (Arizona) State Implementation Plan (SIP).
The purpose of this rulemaking is to separate the organic liquids (non-
gasoline) from the gasoline requirements. The organic liquid (non-
gasoline) transfer requirements are included in amended Rule 350
(Storage Of Organic Liquids At Bulk Plants And Bulk Terminals). The
gasoline storage requirements currently in Rule 350 are being
consolidated into Rule 351. These rule revisions update and clarify the
County regulatory requirements and authority for both the organic liquid
(non-gasoline) industry and the gasoline industry. In addition, the
revisions to Rule 350 address the requirements of the SIP for “moderate”
nonattainment for the 2008 eight-hour ozone national ambient air quality
standard (NAAQS). The proposed amendments in Rule 350 include
Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT) for volatile organic
compounds (VOCs).
Support/Opposition: During the 30-day comment period, the department received written
comments from Kinder Morgan/SFPP; they stated their opinion as
“support” or “other”. Their comments were clarifying in nature; they
suggested re-wording some of the section headings regarding organic
liquid stationary storage tank requirements.
Staff
Recommendation: Approve
Board of Health
Recommendation: Approve per Staff recommended language
Additional
Comments: This regulatory change is following the Enhanced Regulatory Outreach
Program (EROP) Policy and workflow process. The County Manager
briefed the Board of Supervisors regarding this rulemaking in May 2015.
Stakeholder workshops were held June 2015 through February 2016. On
April 25, 2016, the Board of Health approved this regulatory change for
the Expedited Process.

Presented By: Philip A. McNeely, R.G., Director
Prepared By: Hether Krause
Attachments: Summary of the proposed regulatory change (See Item 6 of the Draft
Notice of Final Rulemaking)
Analysis of input received during the process and how that input was
responded to (See Item 13 of the Draft Notice of Final Rulemaking)
Language of proposed regulatory change or amendment (See Item 17 of
the Draft Notice of Final Rulemaking)
Preamble required by Arizona Revised Statutes (A.R.S.) § 49-471.05
(See Draft Notice of Final Rulemaking)
Minutes from Board of Health meeting
Copies of all written and electronic Stakeholder input
Signed copy of the Maricopa County Resolution “Moratorium on
Increased Regulatory Burdens”

Return to list of attachments
DRAFT NOTICE OF FINAL RULEMAKING
MARICOPA COUNTY AIR POLLUTION CONTROL REGULATIONS
REGULATION III – CONTROL OF AIR CONTAMINANTS
RULE 350: STORAGE OF ORGANIC LIQUIDS AT BULK PLANTS AND BULK TERMINALS
PREAMBLE
1. Rule affected Rulemaking action
Rule 350: Storage of Organic Liquids at Bulk Plants and Bulk Terminals Amended
2. Statutory authority for the rulemaking:
Authorizing statutes: A.R.S. §§ 49-474, 49-479, and 49-480
Implementing Statute: A.R.S. § 49-112
3. The effective date of the rule:
Tentative date of adoption: November 2, 2016
4. List of public notices addressing this rulemaking:
Notice of Briefing to Maricopa County Manager: May 2015
Notice of Stakeholder Workshops: June 30, 2015, September 14, 2015, and February 22, 2016
Notice of Maricopa County Board of Health Meeting: April 25, 2016
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking: 22 A.A.R. 1207, May 13, 2016
5. Name and address of department personnel with whom persons may communicate regarding the
rulemaking:
Name: Cheri Dale or Hether Krause
Maricopa County Air Quality Department
Planning and Analysis Division
Address: 1001 N Central Avenue, Suite 125
Phoenix, Arizona 85004
Telephone: (602) 506-6010
Fax: (602) 506-6179
E-mail: aqplanning@mail.maricopa.gov Return to list of attachments
6. Explanation of the rule, including the department's reasons for initiating the rulemaking:
Summary: Rule 350 limits the emission of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) from organic liquids under
actual storage conditions. The rule is applicable to bulk storage of organic liquids in a bulk plant or bulk
terminal stationary storage tank which is used primarily to fill delivery vessels for both the organic liquid
(non-gasoline) and the gasoline industries.
Rule 350 (Storage of Organic Liquids at Bulk Plants and Terminals) was last revised over twenty-five years
ago. Technologies have changed over time. The organic liquid (non-gasoline) and gasoline storage and
distribution industries use different terminology, definitions and methods of operation. Rule revisions
included the separation of organic liquids (non-gasoline) from the gasoline storage requirements. In
addition the rule added the organic liquid transfer requirements to Rule 351. The gasoline storage
requirements previously in Rule 350 were moved to Rule 351 (Loading of Organic Liquids). The revisions
in Rule 350 updated and clarified the county regulatory requirements and authority for the organic liquid
(non-gasoline) industry and the gasoline industry. Revisions to Rule 350 addressed the requirements of the

State Implementation Plan (SIP) for “moderate” nonattainment for the 2008 eight-hour ozone national
ambient air quality standard (NAAQS).
In addition, the amendments corrected typographical or other clerical errors; made minor grammatical
changes to improve readability or clarity; modified the format, numbering, order, capitalization,
punctuation, or syntax of certain text to increase standardization within and among rules; or made various
other minor changes of a purely editorial nature. As these changes did not alter the sense, meaning, or
effect of the rules, they are not described in detail here, but can be readily discerned in the “underline/
strikeout” version of the rules contained in Item 17 of this notice.
Background: As early at the 1960’s, the Maricopa County Health Department (as the department was then
called), Air Pollution Control regulations, Section IV, Handling of Materials, Regulation 1, required
“Material such as…gasoline or other volatile compounds…be kept, processed, used, and transported in
such a manner and by such means that they will not unreasonably leak, escape, evaporate or be otherwise
discharged into the ambient air so as to cause or contribute to air pollution…”1 This early rulemaking
established the basis for the current Rule 350. In 1970, the passage of the Clean Air Act established federal
air quality standards.
Congress established the basic structure of the Clean Air Act (CAA) in 1970. The CAA requires the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to establish national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) for
common and widespread pollutants based on the most current science available. For areas that were
determined to be in nonattainment of the NAAQS, the state was required to adopt federally enforceable
state implementation plans (SIP) in order to achieve and maintain air quality and meet the federally
established air quality standards (the NAAQS)2. The states were responsible for developing and
implementing rules that require reasonably available control technology (RACT) for sources of VOCs
located in the designated ozone nonattainment areas. Local air agencies were required to establish RACT
for source categories not already covered by EPA's Control Techniques Guidelines (CTGs) as well as
tighten RACT for source categories for which RACT had already been defined in the NAAQS3. The EPA
defined RACT as “the lowest emission limitation that a particular source is capable of meeting by the
application of control technology that is reasonably available considering technological and economic
feasibility” (44 FR 53762; September 17, 1979).
In the 1970’s, using the EPA NAAQS and CTGs to identify the established RACT standards, the Maricopa
County Bureau of Air Pollution Control (as the department was then called) revised and renumbered the
county air pollution rules and regulations. The revised county rules established specific requirements for
petroleum products in Regulation III, Rule 33: Storage and Handling of Petroleum Products4. This rule
established requirements to control vapor loss during storage; submerged filling of tanks; loading dock
requirements; and leak proof fill pipe connections.
On March 3, 1978, EPA promulgated a list of ozone nonattainment areas under the provisions of the Clean
Air Act, as amended in 1977 (1977 CAA or pre-amended Act). Maricopa County was included on such list
43 FR 8964, March 3, 1978). On February 24, 1984, the EPA notified the Governor of Arizona, that the
Maricopa County Air Pollution Control District’s (MCAPCD), (as the department was then called) portion
of the Arizona SIP was inadequate and requested that deficiencies in the existing SIP be corrected (EPA's
SIP-Call, 49 FR 18827, May 3, 1984). The MCAPCD was in the process of revising Rule 33 to create
Rules 350, 351, 352, and 353 to address the RACT requirements when the EPA again notified the
Governor of Arizona (May 26, 1988) that the MCAPCD's portion of the Arizona SIP was inadequate and
requested that deficiencies relating to VOC controls and the application of RACT in the existing SIP be
corrected (EPA's second SIP-Call, 53 FR 34500, September 7, 1988).
On November 15, 1990, the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 were enacted. In an amended section of
the CAA, Congress statutorily adopted the requirement that nonattainment areas fix their deficient RACT
rules and established a deadline of May 15, 1991 for states to submit corrections of those deficiencies. The
MCAPCD further revised Rules 350, 351, 352, and 353 to meet the RACT standards. Rule 350 (Storage of
Organic Liquids at Bulk Plants), revised July 13, 1988, and April 6, 1992, was approved by the EPA
effective October 5, 1995 (60 FR 46024). Rule 351(Loading Organic Liquids) revised July 13, 1988 and
November 16, 1992, was approved effective October 5, 1995 (60 FR 46024). Rule 352 (Gasoline Delivery
Vessel Testing and Use), revised July 13, 1988, and November 16, 1992, was approved effective October

5, 1995, (60 FR 46024). Rule 353 (Transfer of Gasoline into Stationary Dispensing Tanks) revised July 13,
1988, and April 6, 1992, was approved effective March 4, 1996 (61 FR 3578).
More recently, the EPA developed national emission standards for hazardous air pollutants (NESHAPS) for
Source Category: Gasoline Distribution Bulk Terminals, Bulk Plants, and Pipeline Facilities (73 FR 1933,
Jan. 10, 2008); a NESHAP for Gasoline-Dispensing Facilities (73 FR 1945, Jan. 10, 2008); and the
NESHAP for Organic Liquid Distribution (non-gasoline) (69 FR 5063, Feb. 3, 2004). These NESHAPS are
often referred to as the maximum achievable control technology (MACT) standards since they were
developed to reflect the maximum achievable degree of HAP emission reduction. New MACT standards
required additional or new emissions testing requirements reflecting the new technologies. New and revised
test methods and leak detection methods were required in these MACT standards. Although the MACT
standards typically apply to large sources, there are test methods and other good practices that are or may
be applicable to small area sources of VOC emissions.
Rule 350 Rulemaking Background: The Maricopa County Air Quality Department (department)
originally adopted Rule 350 (Storage of Organic Liquids at Bulk Plants and Terminals) and Rule
351(Loading of Organic Liquids) to be inclusive of both non-gasoline and gasoline organic liquids. The
purpose of the rules was to control the emission of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) from all organic
liquids. These rules were required in order for the county to comply with the reasonably available control
technology (RACT) documents and other policy statements published by the EPA. Since that time, the
organic liquid (non-gasoline) and the gasoline industry have evolved into two distinct industries. The use of
different terminology, definitions and methods of operation has created confusion in the applicability of
Rule 350 to each industry. In this rulemaking, the department drafted rules specific to the organic liquid
(non-gasoline) storage and distribution industry and for the gasoline storage and distribution industry. This
rulemaking did not propose new rules for the industries but rather made revisions to current rules that
improved the clarity and enforceability of the regulatory requirements for each industry.
The rule revisions included the separation of the organic liquid (non-gasoline) requirements and the
gasoline requirements of Rule 350. The organic liquid (non-gasoline) storage requirements in Rule 350 and
the organic liquid “loading” requirements Rule 351 (Loading of Organic Liquids) were combined and into
one rule, Rule 350. The gasoline storage requirements in Rule 350 were moved into Rule 351. Along with
the separation of the two industry requirements, the department renamed each rule to reflect the rule
revisions.
On May 19, 1993, the department issued technical guidance #TG-003 to address a Stakeholder concern that
Section 301.2 of Rule 350 requiring a tank to have a pressure vacuum valve set to within 10% of the tank’s
maximum, safe working pressure. The Stakeholder provided documentation stating the design working
pressure should not exceed 1 psig and recommended applying the ½ psia operating pressure as CARB
required. Revisions to Rule 350 provided the owner or operator the option of either setting the
pressure/vacuum valve on fixed roof tanks within 10% of the tank’s maximum working pressure or at 0.5
psia, as included in revised Section 301.1(c) of Rule 350. The department rescinded #TG-003 (May 19,
1993) with this rule revision.
A second technical guidance was issued on March 11, 1998 #TG98-002, addressing the requirement of
pressure/vacuum (P/V) valves on both fixed roof and floating roof tanks. Per the discussion in the
document:
Both floating-roof tanks and pressure-tanks are designed and engineered to control vapor
emissions without the use of pressure/vacuum valves. The use of such a valve would not produce
additional emissions control. The rule’s authors had no intention of requiring P/V valves on
floating roof tanks or pressure tanks, but failed to recognize that the way they constructed the rule
would result in this unintended and erroneous interpretation.
The guidance concluded “The subsection 301.2 requirement to have a pressure/vacuum valve does not
apply to floating roof tanks or pressure tanks.” The department revised Rule 350, Section 301.1(c) to
require pressure/vacuum valves on “Each fixed roof stationary storage tank…” This rule revision corrects
the omission in the previous rule. The department rescinded #TG98-002 (March 11, 1998) with this rule
revision.

In addition, the department revised the rule applicability to include organic liquids (non-gasoline) with a
true vapor pressure (TVP) of 0.5 psia. The lowering of the TVP meets current RACT.
Other revisions included the relocation of any exemptions into Section 100, inclusion of definitions and
terms specific to the organic liquid industry, organic liquid regulatory requirements for transferring the
organic liquid, monthly equipment leak inspection requirement, and the addition of optical gas imaging as
an alternative work practice to monitor and identify leaking equipment.
Issues Raised and Discussed During This Rulemaking Process:
The department held three Stakeholder workshops: June 29, 2015, September 14, 2016, and February 22,
2016. Stakeholders included representatives from APS, Caljet, CDM Smith, Cemex, City of Glendale, City
of Mesa, City of Phoenix, Coastal Transport, EnCore Consulting, Envirosure Solutions, Kiewit, Kinder
Morgan, Luke Air Force Base, Pinal County, Ping, Polar Services, SRP, Tamura Environmental,
Washington Elementary School, and EPA.
During the workshops, Stakeholders expressed concerns that the proposed Rule 350 would include any
organic liquid stored at any site. The purpose and applicability were revised to clarify that the rule was
applicable to the storage and transfer of organic liquids at a distribution facility and not at a facility that is
the end user of the organic liquid. The rule does not apply to the storage and transfer of organic liquids at a
facility that does not distribute the organic liquid to be “consumed by other parties.” (Rule 350 definition of
“Organic Liquid Distribution Facility”) The rule title was also revised to clarify the applicability of the rule.
Some definitions pertaining to the gasoline industry were deleted. The definition of GASOLINE was left in
the rule because the exemption section specifically exempts gasoline from the rule. The exemptions were
taken from 40 CFR 63.2406, the Organic Liquid Distribution NESHAP. The partial exemptions in Rule
350 were either retained from current Rule 350 or taken from current Rule 351 if they pertained to organic
liquid (non-gasoline).
Stakeholders were concerned that the rule would apply to all storage containers used for organic liquids.
The department included partial exemptions for organic liquids with a TVP less than 0.5 psia, storage
containers with a capacity less than 250 gallons, a pressure tank, a floating roof tank, and gap inspections.
During the workshops, Stakeholders requested the addition or revision of numerous definitions to reflect
the rule applicability to the organic liquid industry and not the gasoline industry. The department revised
the definitions in the Rule 350 to address this concern.
To further clarify the requirements for organic liquid storage tanks, the department added a table describing
tank size and the applicable rule section number that describes the VOC emission control requirements.
Stakeholders supported this addition to the rule.
Description of Amendments:
Amended the following throughout the rule:
 Revised the title of the rule to: STORAGE AND TRANSFER OF ORGANIC LIQUIDS (NON-
GASOLINE) AT AN ORGANIC LIQUID DISTRIBUTION FACILITY
 Deleted references to gasoline loading and storage
 Changed the word “loading” to “transfer”
 Deleted the word “person” and inserted the words “owner or operator”
 Deleted past compliance dates
 Added or revised specific rule section references
Amended the following in Section 100:
 Revised Section 101 (Purpose) to include the storage and transfer of organic liquid (non-gasoline) at an
organic liquid distribution facility
 Revised Section 102 (Applicability) to apply to the bulk storage and transfer of organic liquid (non-
gasoline) at an organic liquid distribution facility

 Added Section 103 (Exemptions) to include total exemptions and partial exemptions
Amended the following in Section 200:
 Deleted the definition BULK PLANT
 Deleted the definition BULK TERMINAL
 Deleted the definition DELIVERY VESSEL
 Added the definition CARGO TANK
 Added the definition CONTAINER
 Added the definition EXCESS ORGANIC LIQUID DRAINAGE
 Added the definition EXTERNAL FLOATING ROOF STATIONARY STORAGE TANK
 Deleted the definition GAS TIGHT
 Added the definition INTERNAL FLOATING ROOF STATIONARY STORAGE TANK WITH
FIXED COVERING
 Added the definition LEAK FREE
 Deleted the definition LOADING FACILITY
 Revised the definition ORGANIC LIQUID
 Revised the definition SUBMERGED FILL
 Added the definition VAPOR BALANCE SYSTEM
 Added the definition VAPOR COLLECTION/PROCESSING SYSTEM
 Revised the definition VAPOR LOSS CONTROL SYSTEM
 Revised the definition VAPOR TIGHT
Amended the following in Section 300:
 Revised Section 301: Clarified the requirements of an organic liquid stationary storage tank
 Revised Section 301.1: Listed the requirements of a stationary storage tank
 Deleted Section 302: Gasoline Storage Tanks Between 250 And 40,000 Gallons
 Added Section 301.2: Organic Liquid Stationary Storage Tanks with a Capacity of 20,000 Gallons
(75,700 l) to less than 40,000 Gallons (151,400 l)
 Renumbered Section 304 to Section 301.3: Listed out requirements of stationary storage tanks with a
capacity of 40,000 gallons or more
 Renumbered Section 305 to Section 301.4: Listed out the existing requirements
 Added Table 350-1 Summary of Organic Liquid (Non-Gasoline) Stationary Storage Tank VOC
Emission Control Requirements
 Renumbered Section 306 to Section 302: Vapor Loss Control System
 Renumbered Section 307 to Section 302.2: Internal Floating Roof Stationary Storage Tanks with
Fixed Covering.
 Renumbered Section 308 to Section 302.4: Vapor Collection/Processing System
 Added Section 303: Equipment Maintenance and Repair
 Added Section 304: General Requirements for the Transfer of Organic Liquid
 Deleted Section 309: Additional Requirements
 Deleted Section 310: Exemptions

Amended the following in Section 400:
 Deleted Section 401: Annual Inspections of External Floating Roof Stationary Storage Tanks
 Deleted Section 402: Annual Inspections of Internal Floating Roof Tanks
 Deleted Section 403: Five-Year, Full Circumference Inspections
 Deleted Section 404: Semi-Annual Inspections by Owner or Operator
 Deleted Section 405: Compliance Schedule
• Added Section 401: Organic Liquid (Non-Gasoline) Storage Tank Inspections
 Added Section 401.1: Semi-annual Inspections by Owner or Operator
 Added Section 401.2: Inspections of External Floating Roof Stationary Storage Tanks
• Added Section 401.3: Inspections of Internal Floating Roof Stationary Storage Tanks with a Fixed
Covering
 Added Section 402: Monthly Organic Liquid Transfer Equipment Leak Inspections
 Added Section 403: Organic Liquid (Non-Gasoline) Storage Tank Inspections-Availability to Control
Officer
 Added Section 403.1: Annual Inspections of External Floating Roof Tanks
• Added Section 403.2: Annual Inspections of Internal Floating Roof Tanks
 Added Section 403.3: Five-Year, Full Circumference Inspections
 Added Section 404: Other Agencies Requirements
Amended the following in Section 500:
 Deleted Section 501: Vapor Pressure Records
 Deleted Section 502: Compliance Determination Test Methods
 Added Section 501: Monitoring For Leaks
 Added Section 502: Vapor Pressure Records
 Added Section 503: Leak Inspection Records
 Added Section 504: Compliance Inspections
 Added Section 505: Records Retention
 Added Section 506: Compliance Determination-Test Methods
7. Demonstration of compliance with A.R.S. §49-112:
Under A.R.S. § 49-479(C), a county may not adopt a rule or ordinance that is more stringent than the rules
adopted by the Director of the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ) for similar sources
unless it demonstrates compliance with the applicable requirements of A.R.S. §49-112.
§ 49-112 County regulation; standards
§ 49-112(A)
When authorized by law, a county may adopt a rule, ordinance or other regulation that is more stringent
than or in addition to a provision of this title or rule adopted by the director or any board or commission
authorized to adopt rules pursuant to this title if all of the following conditions are met:
1. The rule, ordinance or other regulation is necessary to address a peculiar local condition.
2. There is credible evidence that the rule, ordinance or other regulation is either;

(a) Necessary to prevent a significant threat to public health or the environment that results from a
peculiar local condition and is technically and economically feasible.
(b) Required under a federal statute or regulation, or authorized pursuant to an intergovernmental
agreement with the federal government to enforce federal statutes or regulations if the county rule,
ordinance or other regulation is equivalent to federal statutes or regulation.
3. Any fee or tax adopted under the rule, ordinance or other regulation will not exceed the reasonable
costs of the county to issue and administer that permit or plan approval program.
§ 49-112(B)
When authorized by law, a county may adopt rules, ordinances or other regulations in lieu of a state
program that are as stringent as a provision of this title or rule adopted by the director or any board or
commission authorized to adopt rules pursuant to this title if the county demonstrates that the cost of
obtaining permits or other approvals from the county will approximately equal or be less than the fee or
cost of obtaining similar permits or approvals under this title or any rule adopted pursuant to this title. If the
state has not adopted a fee or tax for similar permits or approvals, the county may adopt a fee when
authorized by law in the rule, ordinance or other regulation that does not exceed the reasonable costs of the
county to issue and administer that permit or plan approval program.
The department complies with A.R.S. § 49-112(A) in that Maricopa County fails to meet the National
Ambient Air Quality Standards for both ozone and particulates. The County failed to meet 2008 8-hour
ozone standard by the marginal area attainment date of July 20, 2015. The EPA issued a final rule, effective
June 3, 2016, reclassifying the Maricopa County area to “moderate” (published at 86 FR 26697, May 4,
2016). Further, a portion of the County was classified as a serious ozone nonattainment area under the
previous 1-hour ozone standard requiring the County to continue to maintain the measures and
requirements that allowed the County to attain that standard. Currently, a portion of Maricopa County and
Apache Junction in Pinal County is designated serious nonattainment for the PM10 24-hour standard. This
is the only serious PM10 nonattainment area in Arizona. Revisions to Rule 350 address the requirements of
the State Implementation Plan (SIP) for “moderate” nonattainment for the 2008 eight-hour ozone national
ambient air quality standard (NAAQS). The amendments in Rule 350 include Reasonably Available
Control Technology (RACT).
The department complies with A.R.S. § 49-112(B) in that the proposed amendments to Rule 350 are not
more stringent than or in addition to a provision of Title 49 or rule adopted by the director or any board or
commission authorized to adopt rules pursuant to Title 49, address the peculiar local conditions in
Maricopa County, are authorized under A.R.S. Title 49, Chapter 3, Article 3, and are not in lieu of a state
program.
8. Documents or studies referenced and/or reviewed for this rulemaking:
Not applicable
9. Showing of good cause why the rule is necessary to promote a statewide interest if the rule will
diminish a previous grant of authority of a political subdivision:
Not applicable
10. Summary of the economic, small business, and consumer impact:
The following discussion addresses each of the elements required for an economic, small business and
consumer impact statement under A.R.S. § 41-1055. The economic summary is based on the number of
Title V and Non-Title V permits issued by the Maricopa County Air Quality Department.
An identification of the rulemaking.
This rulemaking revised Rule 350 (Storage of Organic Liquids at Bulk Plants and Bulk Terminals). The
revised rule is titled: Storage and Transfer of Organic Liquids (Non-Gasoline) at An Organic Liquid
Distribution Facility.
An identification of the persons who will be directly affected by, bear the costs of or directly benefit
from the rulemaking.

The persons who will be directly affected by and bear the costs of this rulemaking will be facilities in
Maricopa County that engage in the bulk storage and transfer of any organic liquid (non-gasoline) with a
vapor pressure 0.5 psia or greater at an organic liquid distribution facility. The department has issued
permits to 26 facilities subject to Rule 350, prior to revision.
A cost benefit analysis of the following:
(a) The probable costs and benefits to the implementing agency and other agencies directly affected
by the implementation and enforcement of the rulemaking.
Because this rulemaking does not impose any new compliance burdens on permitted regulated entities
or introduce additional regulatory requirements, the department deemed that none of the revisions have
potentially significant economic impacts on permitted sources. It is expected that the department will
benefit from the increased clarity of the rule with decreased time to inspect a facility or prepare a
permit. In addition, the rulemaking will not impose increased monetary or regulatory costs on other
state agencies, political subdivisions of this state, persons, or individuals so regulated.
The assumptions of savings with the rule revisions will be reviewed after rule implementation to
confirm their effectiveness. However, the benefits of the rule revision are anticipated to be a result of
the following changes:
- Changing the title of the rule to: STORAGE AND TRANSFER OF ORGANIC LIQUIDS (NON-
GASOLINE) AT AN ORGANIC LIQUID DISTRIBUTION FACILITY;
- Requiring standards at organic liquid distribution facilities for stationary storage tanks with a
capacity greater than 250 gallons for organic liquids with a TVP of 0.5 psia or more;
- Moving requirements originally in Rule 351 that applied to organic liquid (non-gasoline) storage
and transfer to revised Rule 350 to consolidate all of the organic liquid requirements in one rule.
- Allowing partial exemptions for organic liquids with a TVP less than 0.5 psia; storage containers
with a capacity less than 250 gallons; a pressure tank; the floating of a floating roof tank; and gap
inspections;
- Defining numerous additional and revised definitions to reflect the rule applicability to the organic
liquid industry and not the gasoline industry.
The sources subject to revised Rule 350 already have permits in which these requirements are
addressed. Therefore, this revised rule does not impose new requirements on the permitted facilities,
and no costs would be incurred for compliance with the rule revisions.
(b) The probable costs and benefits to a political subdivision of this state directly affected by the
implementation and enforcement of the rulemaking
The rule revisions will not impose increased monetary or regulatory costs on other state agencies,
political subdivisions of this state, persons, or individuals so regulated.
(c) The probable costs and benefits to businesses directly affected by the rulemaking, including any
anticipated effect on the revenues or payroll expenditures of employers who are subject to the
rulemaking.
The department anticipates that increased clarity provided by the Rule 350 revisions will provide a
benefit to the regulated community; it will take less time for sources subject to the rule to understand
and comply with the rule, which leads to increased compliance, which leads to decreased costs of
compliance to the regulated community. The department does not anticipate these rule revisions to
have a significant impact on a person's income, revenue, or employment in this state related to this
activity. The rule revision will not impose increased monetary or regulatory costs on individuals so
regulated.
A general description of the probable impact on private and public employment in businesses,
agencies and political subdivisions of this state directly affected by the rulemaking.
The rule revisions will not impose increased monetary or regulatory costs on other state agencies, political
subdivisions of this state, persons, or individuals so regulated.

A statement of the probable impact of the rulemaking on small businesses.
The rule revisions will not impose increased monetary or regulatory costs on any permitted business,
persons, or individuals so regulated.
(a) An identification of the small businesses subject to the rulemaking.
Small businesses subject to this rulemaking are those facilities in Maricopa County that engage in the
bulk storage and transfer of any organic liquid (non-gasoline) with a vapor pressure of 0.5 psia or
more.
(b) The administrative and other costs required for compliance with the rulemaking.
This rulemaking updates and clarifies existing rule provisions and definitions to be consistent with
federal performance standards, and to reduce confusion and improve understanding and readability.
The department considered the implications of the proposed amendments to the regulated entities and
the implementing agency and deemed that none of the rule revisions have potentially significant
economic impacts.
(c) A description of the methods that the agency may use to reduce the impact on small businesses.
(i) Establishing less costly compliance requirements in the rulemaking for small businesses.
By correcting and clarifying existing rule provisions and definitions, this rulemaking lessens or
eases the regulatory burden for small businesses.
(ii) Establishing less costly schedules or less stringent deadlines for compliance in the
rulemaking.
This rulemaking corrects or clarifies existing rule provisions and definitions to reduce confusion
and improve understanding and readability.
(iii) Exempting small businesses from any or all requirements of the rulemaking.
This rulemaking corrects or clarifies existing rule provisions and definitions to reduce confusion
and improve understanding and readability.
(d) The probable cost and benefit to private persons and consumers who are directly affected by the
rulemaking.
This rulemaking does not impose any new compliance burdens on permitted regulated entities or
introduce additional regulatory requirements and will not impose increased monetary or regulatory
costs on any permitted business, persons, or individuals so regulated. As such, there are no costs to
pass through to consumers, which means there are no impacts on consumers.
A statement of the probable effect on state revenues.
The rule revisions will not impose increased monetary or regulatory costs on other state agencies, political
subdivisions of this state, persons, or individuals so regulated. Without costs to pass through to customers,
there is no projected change in consumer purchase patterns and, thus, no impact on state revenues from
sales taxes.
A description of any less intrusive or less costly alternative methods of achieving the purpose of the
rulemaking.
This rulemaking corrects or clarifies existing rule provisions and definitions to reduce confusion and
improve understanding and readability.
11. Name and address of department personnel with whom persons may communicate regarding the
accuracy of the economic, small business, and consumer impact:
Name: Cheri Dale or Hether Krause
Maricopa County Air Quality Department
Planning and Analysis Division

Address: 1001 N Central Avenue, Suite 125
Phoenix, AZ 85004
Telephone: (602) 506-6010
Fax: (602) 506-6179
E-mail: aqplanning@mail.maricopa.gov
12. Description of the changes between the proposed rule, including supplemental notices and final rule:
Since the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking was published on May 13, 2016 (22 A.A.R 1207), the
department is proposing the following additional amendments:
• Throughout document added either English or metric measurements where both were not included to
provide consistency throughout the rule.
• Section 103.2(a) removed partial exemption for organic liquids having a true vapor pressure less than
0.5 psia, because such organic liquids are not subject to the rule.
• Section 103.2(c)(2) reference to Section 103.2(c)(i) was revised to reference Section 103.3(c)(1)
because there is no (i) or (ii).
• Section 301.1(c) reference to Section 301.2(c)(i) and 301.2(c)(ii) was revised to reference Section
301.1(c)(1) and 301.1(c)(2) because there is no (i) or (ii).
• Section 301.2 “true vapor pressure (TVP) of 0.5 psia through 11.0 psia (26 mm - 569 mm Hg)” revised
to read “…true vapor pressure (TVP) equal to or greater than 0.5 psia but less than 11.0 psia (26≥
mmHg <569).”
• Sections 301.2 and 301.3 revised the wording “…true vapor pressure (TVP) 0.5 through 11.0 psia (26
mm Hg - 569 mm Hg)…” to “…true vapor pressure (TVP) equal to or greater than 0.5 psia but less
than or equal to 11.0 psia (26≥ mmHg ≤569)…” to provide a clear measure of vapor pressure.
• Table 350-1 added metric measurements for TVP to be consistent with the vapor pressure limits
specified in Section 301.
• Section 301.4 replaced the words “Exceeding” and “above” with “Greater Than” to provide consistent
use of terms throughout document.
• Section 302.1(c)(1) reference Section 302.1(c)(ii) was revised to reference Section 302.1(c)(2) because
there is no (i).
• Moved the second and third sentences in Section 303.1(c)(1) to new Sections 302.1(d)(3) and 302.1(b),
respectively
• Revised reference in Section 401.2(b)(1) to reference to Section 401.2(a)
• Section 404 (Other Agencies’ Requirements): Arizona Department of Weights and Measures became
Department of Agriculture, Weights and Measures Services Division on July 1, 2016. Revised the rule
to reflect the new title of the division.
• Included text in Section 506 (Compliance Determination-Test Methods Incorporated By Reference)
that allows for the use of alternative test methods to determine compliance with the rule and that
allows test methods as approved by the Administrator to be used and clarified the provision regarding
when more than one test method is permitted for a compliance determination.
13. Summary of the comments made regarding the rule and the department response to them:
Since the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking was published on May 13, 2016 (22 A.A.R. 1207), the
department received comments from Kinder Morgan/SFPP. The comments and the department’s responses
are provided below. Return to list of attachments
Comment #1: Section 301.1 (Organic Liquid Stationary Storage Tank Requirements)

SFPP proposes to revise the heading/title of Section 301.1 to “All Stationary Storage Tanks with A
Capacity of 250 Gallons (946 L) to less than 20,000 Gallons (75,700 L).”
Response #1: Section 301.1 (Organic Liquid Stationary Storage Tank Requirements)
Section 301.1 does apply to all stationary storage tanks with a capacity of 250 gallons or more with no
upper limit. The requirements are not limited to organic liquid storage tanks with a capacity between 250
and 20,000 gallons; therefore, the department is not revising Section 301.1 heading as suggested.
Comment #2: Section 301.2 (Organic Liquid Stationary Storage Tank Requirements)
SFPP proposes to revise the heading/title of Section 301.2 to “Organic Liquid Stationary Storage Tanks
With a Capacity of 20,000 Gallons (75,700L) to Less Than 40,000 Gallons (151,400 L)”
Response #2: Section 301.2 (Organic Liquid Stationary Storage Tank Requirements)
The department proposes to revise the section heading as SFPP has suggested.
Comment #3: Table 350-1
SFPP proposes to revise the first row tank capacity description in Table 350-1 to “All organic (non-
gasoline) stationary storage tanks >250 gallons to <20,000 gallons”.
Response #3: Table 350-1
The department proposes to revise Table 350-1 as SFPP has suggested.
14. Any other matters prescribed by the statute that are applicable to the specific department or to any
specific rule or class of rules:
Not applicable
15. Incorporations by reference and their location in the rule:
The following test methods are incorporated by reference in Rule 350, Section 506:
 EPA Method 2A - Direct Measurement of Gas Volume Through Pipes and Small Ducts
 EPA Method 18 - Measurement of Gaseous Organic Compound Emissions by Gas Chromatography
 EPA Method 21 - Determination of Volatile Organic Compound Leaks
 EPA Method 25A - Determination of Total Gaseous Organic Concentration Using a Flame Ionization
Analyzer
 EPA Method 25A - Determination of Total Gaseous Organic Concentration Using a Nondispersive
Infrared Analyzer
 EPA Method 27 - Determination of Vapor Tightness of Gasoline Delivery Tank Using Pressure
Vacuum Test
 Optical Gas Imaging: Alternative Work Practice for Monitoring Equipment Leaks, 40 CFR 60.18(g)
 California Air Resources Board (CARB) - Test Procedure TP-201.1E Leak Rate and Cracking Pressure
of Pressure/Vacuum Vent Valves, October 8, 2003
 ASTM D2879-10 Standard Test Method for Vapor Pressure-Temperature Relationship and Initial
Decomposition Temperature of Liquids by Isoteniscope
 ASTM D6420-99 (Reapproved 2004), Standard Test Method for Determination of Gaseous Organic
Compounds by Direct Interface Gas Chromatography-Mass Spectrometry
16. Was this rule previously an emergency rule?
No
17. Full text of the rule follows:
MARICOPA COUNTY

Return to list of attachments
AIR POLLUTION CONTROL REGULATIONS
REGULATION III – CONTROL OF AIR CONTAMINANTS
RULE 350
STORAGE AND TRANSFER OF ORGANIC LIQUIDS (NON-GASOLINE) AT BULK PLANTS AND
BULK TERMINALS AN ORGANIC LIQUID DISTRIBUTION FACILITY
INDEX
SECTION 100 – GENERAL
101 PURPOSE
102 APPLICABILITY
103 EXEMPTIONS
SECTION 200 – DEFINITIONS
201 BULK PLANT
202 BULK TERMINAL
203 DELIVERY VESSEL
201 CARGO TANK
202 CONTAINER
203 EXCESS ORGANIC LIQUID DRAINAGE
204 EXTERNAL FLOATING ROOF STATIONARY STORAGE TANK
204 GAS TIGHT
205 GASOLINE
206 INTERNAL FLOATING ROOF STATIONARY STORAGE TANK WITH FIXED COVERING
206 LOADING FACILITY
207 LEAK FREE
207 208 ORGANIC LIQUID
209 ORGANIC LIQUID DISTRIBUTION FACILITY
208 210 STATIONARY STORAGE TANK
209 211 SUBMERGED FILL PIPE
210 212 TRUE VAPOR PRESSURE (TVP)
213 VAPOR BALANCE SYSTEM
214 VAPOR COLLECTION/PROCESSING SYSTEM
211 215 VAPOR LOSS CONTROL DEVICE SYSTEM
212 216 VAPOR TIGHT
SECTION 300 – STANDARDS
301 ALL STORAGE TANKS GREATER THAN 250 GALLONS (946 L)
302 GASOLINE STORAGE TANKS BETWEEN 250 AND 40,000 GALLONS (946 - 151,400 L)
303 ORGANIC LIQUID STORAGE TANKS OF 20,000 THROUGH 39,999 GALLONS CAPACITY
(75,700 - 151,396 L)
304 STORAGE TANKS OF 40,000 GALLONS (151,400 L) OR MORE

305 TANKS STORING LIQUIDS HAVING VAPOR PRESSURES EXCEEDING 11 PSIA
306 EXTERNAL FLOATING ROOF STORAGE TANKS
307 INTERNAL FLOATING ROOF TANKS WITH FIXED COVERING
308 VAPOR COLLECTION/PROCESSING SYSTEM
309 ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS
310 EXEMPTIONS
301 ORGANIC LIQUID STATIONARY STORAGE TANK REQUIREMENTS
302 VAPOR LOSS CONTROL SYSTEM
303 EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE AND REPAIR
304 GENERAL REQUIREMENTS FOR THE TRANSFER OF ORGANIC LIQUID
SECTION 400 – ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS
401 ANNUAL INSPECTIONS OF EXTERNAL FLOATING ROOF TANKS
402 ANNUAL INSPECTIONS OF INTERNAL FLOATING ROOF TANKS
403 FIVE-YEAR, FULL CIRCUMFERENCE INSPECTIONS
404 SEMI-ANNUAL INSPECTIONS BY OWNER OR OPERATOR
405 COMPLIANCE SCHEDULE
401 ORGANIC LIQUID (NON-GASOLINE) STATIONARY STORAGE TANK INSPECTIONS
402 MONTHLY ORGANIC LIQUID TRANSFER EQUIPMENT LEAK INSPECTIONS
403 ORGANIC LIQUID (NON-GASOLINE) STORAGE TANK INSPECTIONS-AVAILABILITY
TO CONTROL OFFICER
404 OTHER AGENCIES’ REQUIREMENTS
SECTION 500 – MONITORING AND RECORDS
501 VAPOR PRESSURE RECORDS
502 COMPLIANCE DETERMINATION TEST METHODS
501 MONITORING FOR LEAK
502 VAPOR PRESSURE RECORDS
503 LEAK INSPECTION RECORDS
504 COMPLIANCE INSPECTIONS
505 RECORDS RETENTION
506 COMPLIANCE DETERMINATION - TEST METHODS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE
Revised 07/13/88
Revised 04/06/92
Revised 07/13/1988; Revised 04/06/1992; Revised MM/DD/YYYY
MARICOPA COUNTY
AIR POLLUTION CONTROL REGULATIONS
REGULATION III – CONTROL OF AIR CONTAMINANTS
RULE 350

STORAGE AND TRANSFER OF ORGANIC LIQUIDS (NON-GASOLINE) AT BULK PLANTS AND
TERMINALS AN ORGANIC LIQUID DISTRIBUTION FACILITY
SECTION 100 – GENERAL
101 PURPOSE: To limit emissions of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) from organic liquids (non-gasoline)
under actual storage and transfer conditions at an organic liquid distribution facility.
102 APPLICABILITY: This rule is applicable to the transfer and bulk storage and transfer of any organic
liquid (non-gasoline) with a true vapor pressure (TVP) greater than 0.5 psia in a bulk plant or bulk terminal
stationary storage tank which is used primarily to fill delivery vessels. at an organic liquid distribution
facility. Compliance with the provisions of this rule shall not relieve any owner or operator subject to the
requirements of this rule from complying with any other federally enforceable New Sources Performance
Standards (NSPS) and National Emissions Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP). In such
cases, the most stringent standard shall apply.
103 EXEMPTIONS:
103.1 Total Exemptions: For the purposes of this rule, the following are exempt from this rule:
a. Gasoline facilities subject to Rule 351 of these rules;
b. Gasoline, including aviation gasoline, kerosene, diesel fuel, asphalt and heavier distillate oils
and fuel oils;
c. Fuel consumed or dispensed at the facility directly to user such as fleet refueling, that support
the operation of the facility;
d. Hazardous waste;
e. Wastewater or ballast water; and
f. Any non-crude oil liquid with an annual average TVP less than 0.7 kilopascals (0.1 psia). [40
CFR §63.2406]
103.2 Partial Exemptions:
a. Stationary storage tanks and containers with a capacity of less than 250 gallons (946.35 L) are
exempt from Section 301 and 302 of this rule.
b. An organic liquid distribution facility built prior to October 2, 1978, is not required to have a
vapor loss control system at the transfer rack when all of the following are complied with:
(1) The distribution facility transfers less than 120,000 gallons (454,800 l) of organic liquid
(non-gasoline) into cargo tanks in any consecutive 30-day period.
(2) Any organic liquid distribution facility that becomes subject to all of the provisions of
this rule by exceeding the threshold in Section 103.2(b)(1) of this rule, will remain
subject to the rule provisions even if its output later falls below the threshold.
(3) Keep current records of amount of organic liquid transferred and keep them readily
accessible to the Department upon request for at least five (5) years.
(4) Transfer organic liquid using submerged fill only.
(5) The owner or operator of the organic liquid distribution facility shall observe all parts of
the transfer and shall discontinue the transfer if any liquid or vapor leaks are observed.
c. Submerged Fill: An organic liquid (non-gasoline) storage tank is exempt from the
requirement that a submerged fill discharge pipe be fully submerged when:
(1) The tank is being drained completely.
(2) The tank is being initially filled or filled after being completely drained.
d. A stationary pressure tank maintaining working pressure sufficient at all times to prevent
organic vapor loss to the atmosphere is exempt from Section 302 of this rule.

e. An owner or operator is exempt from the requirement that the roof be floating when the tank
is being drained completely and when it is being filled, as long as both processes are
accomplished continuously and as rapidly as practicable.
f. The owner or operator is exempted from the requirements for secondary seals and the
secondary seal gap criteria when performing gap measurements or inspections of the primary
seal.
g. Opening of Hatches, Vent Valves or Other Vapor Sealing Devices:
(1) A hatch, vent valve or other vapor sealing device may be opened for vacuum relief on a
cargo tank or rail car when the organic liquid is in the process of being transferred from
the cargo tank or rail car into a storage tank. Reclose hatch, vent valve or other vapor
sealing device at the completion of the transfer process.
(2) When VOC vapors from organic liquids are present within a cargo tank, authorized
government agents as well as owners or operators and their contractors may open vapor
containment equipment while performing operations required by these Maricopa County
Air Pollution Control Regulations or by other statutory entities, but shall be restricted as
follows unless otherwise approved in advance by the Control Officer:
(a) Wait at least three (3) minutes after transfer is complete or cargo tank has come to a
complete stop before opening hatch or other vapor seal.
(b) Reclose hatch or other vapor sealing device within 3 minutes of opening.
(c) Limit wind speed at opened hatch or other opened sealing device to not more than
three (3) mph (1.34 m/sec).
SECTION 200 – DEFINITIONS: For the purpose of this rule, the following definitions shall apply:, in addition to
those definitions found in Rule 100 (General Provisions and Definitions) of these rules. In the event of any
inconsistency between any of the Maricopa County air pollution control rules, the definitions in this rule take
precedence.
201 BULK PLANT - Any loading facility at which gasoline and/or other organic liquids with a true vapor pressure
of 1.5 psia (77.5 mm Hg) or greater under any actual storage conditions are received from delivery vessels for
storage in on-site stationary tanks, and from which such liquids also are transferred to delivery vessels.
202 BULK TERMINAL - Any primary distributing loading facility which has ever received in any consecutive
30-day period over 600,000 gallons (2,271,180 l) of gasoline and/or other organic liquids with a true vapor
pressure of 1.5 psia (77.5 mm Hg) or greater under actual storage conditions; or any loading facility where
delivery of such liquids to the facility is primarily by pipeline.
203 DELIVERY VESSEL - Any vehicular-mounted container such as a railroad tank car, tanker truck, tank
trailer or any other mobile container used to transport organic liquids.
201 CARGO TANK: A liquid-carrying tank permanently attached and forming an integral part of a motor
vehicle or truck trailer. For the purposes of this rule, vacuum trucks used exclusively for maintenance or
spill response are not considered cargo tanks. [40 CFR §63.2406]
202 CONTAINER: A portable unit in which a material can be stored, transported, treated, disposed of, or
otherwise handled. Examples of containers include, but are not limited to, drums and portable cargo
containers known as “portable tanks” or “totes.” [40 CFR §63.2406]
203 EXCESS ORGANIC LIQUID DRAINAGE: More than 10 milliliters (0.34 fluid ounces or 2 teaspoonsful)
of organic liquid lost from the end of a fill hose (or vapor hose if one is in use) in the process of connecting
or disconnecting the hose; or any quantity of organic liquid escaping out the end of such a hose that wets
any area(s) on the ground having an aggregate area greater than 113 square inches, or the perimeter of
which would encompass a circle of 12 inches (30.5 cm) diameter.
204 EXTERNAL FLOATING ROOF STATIONARY STORAGE TANK: An open top storage tank with a
floating roof consisting of a double deck or pontoon single deck that rests upon and is supported by the
liquid being contained.

204 GAS TIGHT - Having no leak of gaseous organic compound(s) exceeding 10,000 ppm above background
when measurements are made using EPA Method 21 with a methane calibration standard.
205 GASOLINE: Any petroleum distillate, petroleum distillate/alcohol blend, petroleum distillate/organic
compound blend, or alcohol having a true vapor pressure of 1.5 psia (77.5 mm Hg) or greater under any
actual conditions of storage and handling, and which is used as a fuel for internal combustion engines. Any
petroleum distillate, petroleum distillate/alcohol blend, petroleum distillate/organic compound blend, or alcohol
that meets both of the following conditions:
209.1 Has a Reid vapor pressure between 4.0 and 14.7 psi (200–760 mm Hg.), as determined by ASTM
D323-15a; and
209.2 Is used as a fuel for internal combustion engines. [40 CFR 63.11100]
206 INTERNAL FLOATING ROOF STATIONARY STORAGE TANK WITH FIXED COVERING: A
stationary storage tank with a floating cover or roof that rests upon or is floated upon the liquid being
contained, and that also has a fixed roof on top of the tank shell. For the purposes of this rule, an external
floating roof stationary storage tank that has been retrofitted with a geodesic dome or other fixed roof shall
be considered to be an internal floating roof stationary storage tank.
207 LEAK FREE: A condition in which there is no organic liquid escape or seepage of more than 3 drops per
minute from organic liquid storage, handling, and ancillary equipment, including, but not limited to,
seepage and escapes from above ground fittings.
206 LOADING FACILITY - Any operation or facility such as a gasoline storage tank farm, pipeline terminal,
bulk plant, loading dock or combination thereof, where organic liquids are transferred or loaded into or out
of delivery vessels for future distribution. Included are all related pollutant-emitting activities which are
located on one or more contiguous or adjacent properties, and are under the control of the same person or
persons under common control.
207 208 ORGANIC LIQUID: Any organic compound which exists as a liquid under any actual conditions of use,
transport or storage. For the purposes of this rule, gasoline is not considered an organic liquid.
209 ORGANIC LIQUID DISTRIBUTION FACILITY: A stationary source that primarily receives and
distributes organic liquids that are manufactured and consumed by other parties. This includes the
combination of activities and equipment used to store or transfer organic liquids into, out of, or within a
plant site regardless of the specific activity being performed. Activities include, but are not limited to,
storage, transfer, blending, compounding and packaging. [40 CFR 63.2406]
208 210 STATIONARY STORAGE TANK: Any tank, reservoir or other container used to store, but not
transport, organic liquids.
209 211 SUBMERGED FILL PIPE: Any organic liquid discharge pipe or nozzle which meets at least one of the
applicable specifications: as follows:
209.1 211.1 Top-Fill or Bottom-Fill Tanks: The end of the discharge pipe or nozzle is totally submerged
when the liquid level is six (6) inches (15 cm) from the bottom of the tank.
209.2 211.2 Side-Fill: At its highest point within the storage tank, The the end of the discharge pipe or nozzle
is totally submerged when the liquid level is eighteen (18) inches (46 cm) from the bottom of the
tank.
211.3 API Standard 650 Compliant: A floating roof storage tank meets the submerged fill requirements
in this rule, if the discharge pipe or nozzle meets both of the following requirements:
a. Is kept completely submerged, including when the roof rests on its legs, except when the tank
is being emptied completely and refilled; and
b. Is designed and installed according to the API Standard 650.

Submerged Fill Diagram
NOT TO SCALE
Top Fill Opening
6” Maximum
Height from bottom
of the tank
Side Fill
Maximum 18” from
bottom of the tank
Bottom Fill
Minimum 6”
of liquid
210 212 TRUE VAPOR PRESSURE (TVP): Absolute vapor pressure of a liquid at its existing temperature of
storage and handling.
213 VAPOR BALANCE SYSTEM: A system of vapor tight piping, hoses, equipment and devices which
collect and return displaced vapors between a cargo tank and a storage tank.
214 VAPOR COLLECTION/PROCESSING SYSTEM: A vapor loss control system consisting of a vapor
gathering subsystem capable of collecting the organic vapors and organic gases plus a second subsystem
capable of processing such vapors and gases, preventing at least 95 percent of the volatile organic
compounds entering it from entering the atmosphere.
211 215 VAPOR LOSS CONTROL DEVICE SYSTEM: Any piping, hoses, equipment, and devices which are
used to collect, store and/or process organic vapors at a bulk terminal, bulk plant, service station or other
operation handling gasoline and/or other organic liquids. A system for reducing emissions to the
atmosphere, consisting of an abatement device and a collection system, which achieves the abatement
efficiency or emission limit during the transfer operation at an organic liquid distribution facility.
212 216 VAPOR TIGHT: A condition where no organic vapor leak reaches or exceeds 100 percent of the lower
explosive limit at a distance of one inch (2.5 cm) from a leak when measured with a combustible gas
detector or an organic vapor analyzer, both calibrated with propane in which a suitable detector at the site
of (potential) leakage of vapor shows less than 10,000 ppmv when calibrated with methane or the detector
shows less than 1/5 lower explosive limit (LEL) when calibrated with a gas specified by the manufacturer
and used according to the manufacturer’s instructions.
SECTION 300 – STANDARDS
301 ORGANIC LIQUID STATIONARY STORAGE TANK REQUIREMENTS:
301.1 All Stationary Storage Tanks with a Capacity Greater than 250 Gallons (946 L): No person
shall install or use a stationary storage tank with a capacity greater than 250 gallons (946 l) for
storing organic liquids with a true vapor pressure of 1.5 psia (77.5 mm Hg) or more unless such a
tank meets the following requirements: An owner or operator of a stationary storage tank with a
capacity greater than 250 gallons (946 l) shall store organic liquid with a TVP of 0.5 psia (26 mm
Hg) or more in a stationary storage tank meeting all of the following:
a. Each stationary storage tank has a fill pipe that is maintained leak free and vapor tight when
organic liquid is not in the process of being transferred.
301.1 b. The Each stationary storage tank has a permanently installed submerged fill pipe. Where
because of government regulation, including, but not limited to, Fire Department codes, such

submerged fill pipe cannot be installed, a nozzle extension that reaches within six (6) inches
of the tank bottom shall be used to fill the tank.
Note1
301.2 c. Each fixed roof stationary storage The tank has a pressure/vacuum valve that complies with
both Section 301.1(c)(1) and 301.1(c)(2) of this rule. which is set within ten percent of the
tank's maximum, safe working-pressure. An owner or operator shall:
(1) Install a pressure/vacuum vent valve that is either:
(a) Set within ten percent (10%) of the tank's maximum, safe working-pressure; or
(b) Set at least at 0.5 psia (25.9 mm Hg) or per manufacturer’s recommendation.
(2) Maintain the pressure/vacuum vent in good working order.
302 GASOLINE STORAGE TANKS BETWEEN 250 AND 40,000 GALLONS (946 -151,400 L): No person
shall store gasoline in a stationary storage tank with a capacity less than 40,000 gallons (151,400 l) but
greater than 250 gallons (946 l) unless the tank is equipped with a vapor recovery system which collects
and returns displaced vapors to the delivery vessel using vapor-tight fittings and lines; or such tank uses at
least one of the vapor loss control methods in Sections 306, 307, or 308 of this rule.
303 301.2 Organic Liquid Stationary Storage Tanks With a Capacity of 20,000
Gallons (75,700L) Through 39,999 Gallons Capacity (946 L-151,396L) to Less Than 40,000
Gallons (151,400 L): No person shall store organic liquids with a true vapor pressure (TVP) of
1.5 psia through 11.0 psia (77.5 mm 569 mm Hg) in a stationary tank with a capacity from 20,000
through 39,999 gallons (75,700 - 151,396 l) unless the tank is equipped with a vapor recovery
system which collects and returns displaced vapors to the delivery vessel using vapor-tight fittings
and lines; or such tank uses at least one of the vapor loss control methods specified in Sections
306, 307, or 308 of this rule. An owner or operator of an organic liquid stationary storage tank
with a capacity between 20,000 gallons (75,700 l) but less than 40,000 gallons (151,400 l), shall
store organic liquids with a TVP equal to or greater than 0.5 psia but less than or equal to 11.0 psia
(26 ≥ mmHg ≤ 569) in a stationary storage tank meeting all of the following requirements:
a. The stationary storage tank shall:
(1) Be maintained leak free.
(2) Be maintained vapor tight.
(3) Be equipped with at least one of the vapor loss control systems specified in Section
301.2(b) of this rule.
b. An owner or operator shall install and maintain at least one of the following vapor loss control
systems as described in Section 302 of this rule:
(1) Install and maintain a vapor recovery system which collects and returns displaced vapors
to the cargo tank using vapor-tight fittings and lines; or
(2) Install and maintain an external floating roof stationary storage tank; or
(3) Install and maintain an internal floating roof stationary storage tank with a fixed cover; or
(4) Install and maintain a vapor collection/processing system.
304 301.3 Organic Liquid Stationary Storage Tanks with a Capacity Equal to or Greater than Of
40,000 Gallons (151,400 L) or More: No person shall place, store or hold in any stationary
storage tank having a capacity of 40,000 gallons (151,400 L) or more, any gasoline or organic
liquid having a true vapor pressure of 1.5 or greater 1.5 through 11.0 psia (77.5 mm Hg - 569 mm
Hg) under actual storage conditions, unless such storage tank is equipped with at least one of the
vapor loss control devices specified in Sections 306, 307, or 308. An owner or operator of an
1 This note is not part of Rule 350, but is provided for the reader’s convenience. The requirement of subsection 301.2 for a pressure/vacuum
valve is not applicable to floating roof tanks.

organic liquid stationary storage tank with a capacity equal to or greater than 40,000 gallons
(151,400 l) shall store organic liquids with a TVP equal to or greater than 0.5 psia but equal to or
less than 11.0 psia (26 ≥ mmHg ≤ 569) in a stationary storage tank meeting all of the following
requirements, unless such stationary storage tank is equipped with at least one of the vapor loss
control systems described in Section 302 of this rule:
a. Install and maintain an external floating roof stationary storage tank; or
b. Install and maintain an internal floating roof stationary storage tank with a fixed cover; or
c. Equip the stationary storage tank with a vapor collection/processing system as described in
Section 302 of this rule.
305 301.4 Organic Liquid Stationary Storage Tanks Storing Liquids Having Vapor Pressures A
TVP Exceeding Greater Than 11 PSIA: No person shall place, store, or hold in a stationary tank
having a capacity over 250 gallons (946 l) organic liquid(s) with a true vapor pressure above 11.0
psia (569 mm Hg) unless such a tank is either a pressure tank maintaining working pressure
sufficient at all times to prevent organic vapor/gas loss to the atmosphere or is equipped with a
vapor collection/processing system specified in Section 308 of this rule. An owner or operator
shall place, store, or hold organic liquid with a TVP greater than 11.0 psia (569 mm Hg) in a
stationary storage tank that meets at least one of the vapor loss control methods specified below:
a. Maintain a working pressure in the stationary storage tank that is sufficient at all times to
prevent organic vapor loss to the atmosphere.
b. Equip the stationary storage tank with a vapor collection/processing system as described in
Section 302 of this rule.
Table 350-1
Summary of Organic Liquid (Non-Gasoline) Stationary Storage Tank VOC Emission Control Requirements
True Vapor Pressure of Organic Liquid in Tank
0.5≥ psia <1.5 1.5≥ psia ≤11.0 >11.0 psia
(26≥ mm Hg <77.5) (77.5 ≥ mm Hg ≤569) (>569 mm Hg)
Tank Capacity Applicable Rule 350 Applicable Rule 350 Applicable Rule 350
Section: Section: Section:
All organic liquid (non-gasoline) Section 301.1 Section 301.1 Section 301.4
stationary storage tanks >250
gallons
All organic liquid (non-gasoline) Section 301.1 Section 301.1 and Section 301.4
storage tanks 20,000 gallons to Section 301.2
<40,000 gallons
All organic liquid (non-gasoline) Section 301.1 Sections 301.1 and Section 301.4
storage tanks ≥40,000 gallons Section 301.3
302 VAPOR LOSS CONTROL SYSTEM:
306 302.1 External Floating Roof Stationary Storage Tanks: This vapor loss control device is an
uncovered floating roof consisting of either a pontoon type or a double-deck type roof. It must rest
on and be supported by the surface of the liquid contents, be equipped with a continuous primary
seal to close the space between the roof eave and tank wall, except as provided in subsection 309.1
and have a continuous secondary seal which is of a design that is in accordance with accepted
standards of the petroleum industry. The secondary seal shall meet the following
requirements: An external floating roof stationary storage tank must meet the following
requirements:

a. The owner or operator of an external floating roof stationary storage tank and vapor balance
system, or vapor collection/processing system, or vapor loss control system shall properly
install, properly maintain and properly operate the equipment.
b. The owner or operator of an external floating roof stationary storage tank shall operate an
external floating roof tank subject to the provisions of this rule, except for tanks having
metallic shoe primary seals onto which secondary seals were installed prior to July 13, 1988,
and unless a secondary seal extends from the roof to the tank shell (a rim-mounted seal) and is
not attached to the primary seal.
c. External Floating Roof Requirements:
(1) The floating roof shall rest on and be supported by the surface of the liquid contents.
(2) The floating roof shall be equipped with a continuous primary seal to close the space
between the roof eave and tank wall, except as provided in Section 103.2 of this rule.
(3) The floating roof shall have a continuous secondary seal which is of a design that is in
accordance with accepted standards of the organic liquids industry. The secondary seal
shall meet the requirements of Section 302.1(d) of this rule.
d. Secondary Seal Requirements:
306.1 (1) The secondary seal is to be installed above the primary seal so that it completely covers
the space between the roof edge or primary seal and the tank wall, except as provided
in subsection 306.2 Section 302.1(d)(2) of this rule. Storage tanks constructed after July
13, 1988, shall have a secondary seal that is rim-mounted. Except for tanks having
metallic shoe primary seals onto which secondary seals were installed prior to July 13,
1988, by October 6, 1993 no person shall operate an external floating roof tank subject to
the provisions of this rule unless a secondary seal extends from the roof to the tank shell
(a rim-mounted seal) and is not attached to the primary seal.
306.2 (2) The accumulated area of gaps between the tank wall and the secondary seal shall not
exceed 1.0 square inch per foot (21.2 cm2 per meter) of tank diameter. Determinations of
gap area shall only be made at the point(s) where the gaps exceed 1/8 one eighth (1/8)
inch (3 mm). The width of any portion of any gap shall not exceed 1/2 one half (1/2) inch
(1.27 cm).
(3) Stationary storage tanks constructed after July 13, 1988, shall have a secondary seal that
is rim-mounted.
306.3 The owner or operator is exempted from the requirements for secondary seals and the secondary
seal gap criteria when performing gap measurements or inspections of the primary seal.
e. External Floating Roof Openings:
(1) Floating roof tanks subject to the provisions of Section 302.1 of this rule shall have no
visible holes, tears or other openings in the seal or in any seal fabric.
(2) The accumulated area of gaps between a tank's wall and primary seal shall not exceed ten
(10) square inches per foot of tank diameter (212 cm2 per meter).
(3) The width of any portion of any gap shall not exceed one and one half (1½) inches (3.8
cm).
(4) Where applicable, all openings except drains shall be equipped with a cover seal or lid.
(5) Where applicable, the cover seal or lid shall be in a closed position at all times, except
when the system is in actual use.
(6) Automatic bleeder vents shall be closed at all times, except when the roof is floated off or
landed on the roof leg supports.

(7) Rim vents, if provided, shall be set to open only when the roof is being floated off the
roof leg supports or at the manufacturer's recommended setting.
307 302.2 Internal Floating Roof Stationary Storage Tanks with Fixed Covering: This vapor loss control
device is a covered tank with an internal floating roof resting on the contained liquid. This An
internal floating roof stationary storage tank and its appurtenances shall meet the applicable
requirements as follows:
a. The owner or operator of an internal floating roof stationary storage tank and associated
emission control equipment shall properly install, maintain and operate the equipment.
307.1 b. Bulk terminal tanks Organic liquid stationary storage tanks for which construction,
reconstruction or modification commenced after July 23, 1984, must comply with all
applicable requirements of the EPA New Source Performance Standard (NSPS), 40 CFR Part
60, Subpart Kb- Standards of Performance for Volatile Organic Liquid Storage Vessels
(Including Petroleum Liquid Storage Vessels) for Which Construction, Reconstruction, or
Modification Commenced after July 23, 1984. This federal standard is adopted and
incorporated by reference in Rule 360 and Rule 370 of these rules.
307.2 c. All stationary storage tanks not subject to subsection 307.1 Section 302.2(b) of this rule must
comply with one of the following:
(1) Comply with Sections of 40 CFR Part 60, Subpart Kb, notwithstanding the type of
facility and the date of tank construction, reconstruction or modification that are not
addressed in Section 302.2(b) of this rule; or
(2) Have at least one continuous seal which completely covers the space between the roof
edge and tank wall, except as provided in subsection 309.1 Section 302.2(d) of this rule,
and meet at least one of the following requirements:
(a) Have a contact-type roof resting completely on the liquid surface.
(b) Have a liquid mounted seal.
(c) Have two seals, a primary and a secondary.
d. Internal Floating Roof Openings:
(1) Floating roof tanks subject to the provisions of Section 302.2 of this rule shall have no
visible holes, tears or other openings in the seal or in any seal fabric.
(2) The accumulated area of gaps between a tank's wall and primary seal shall not exceed ten
(10) square inches per foot of tank diameter (212 cm2 per meter).
(3) The width of any portion of any gap shall not exceed one and one half (1½) inches (3.8
cm).
(4) Where applicable, all openings except drains shall be equipped with a cover seal or lid.
(5) Where applicable, the cover seal or lid shall be in a closed position at all times, except
when the system is in actual use.
(6) Automatic bleeder vents shall be closed at all times, except when the roof is floated off or
landed on the roof leg supports.
(7) Rim vents, if provided, shall be set to open only when the roof is being floated off the
roof leg supports or at the manufacturer's recommended setting.
308 302.3 Vapor Collection/Processing System: This vapor loss control device system consists of a vapor
gathering subsystem capable of collecting the organic vapors and organic gases plus a second
subsystem capable of processing such vapors and gases, preventing at least 95 percent by weight
of the volatile organic compounds entering it from escaping to the atmosphere.

a. An owner or operator of an organic liquid distribution facility that has an organic liquid
throughput greater than 600,000 gallons (2,271,247 l) in any consecutive 30-day period, shall
install, operate and maintain a vapor loss control system.
308.1 b. The vapor processing subsystem shall be gas-tight vapor-tight except for the designated
exhaust.
308.2 c. Any tank gauging or sampling device on a tank, vented to such a
vapor collection/processing loss control system, shall be equipped with a gas-tight vapor-tight
cover which shall be closed at all times except during gauging or sampling procedures.
308.3 d. All pressure-vacuum vent valves shall be constructed and maintained in a gas tight vapor-tight
condition except when the operating pressure exceeds the valve release setting.
303 EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE AND REPAIR: The owner or operator of an organic liquid distribution
facility shall:
303.1 Maintain the equipment associated with the storage and transfer of organic liquid to be all of the
following:
a. Leak free;
b. Vapor tight; and
c. In good working order.
303.2 Repair and Retest: The owner or operator of a vapor loss control system that exceeds the standards
of this rule shall notify the Control Officer immediately and observe the following time schedule
for corrective action:
a. Concentrations at or above the lower explosive limit must be brought into compliance within
24 hours of detection.
b. For vapor collection/processing equipment subject to gas-tight standard, leak concentrations
exceeding 10,000 ppm but less than 50,000 ppm as methane shall be brought into compliance
within 5 days of detection.
c. Except as the Control Officer otherwise specifies, a leak source must be tested after presumed
leak-correction within fifteen (15) minutes of recommencing use. If leak standards are
exceeded in this test, the use of the leak-correction equipment shall be discontinued until
correction is verified by retesting.
304 GENERAL REQUIREMENTS FOR THE TRANSFER OF ORGANIC LIQUID: The owner or
operator of an organic liquid distribution facility shall comply with the following:
304.1 Transfer of Organic Liquid into Stationary Storage Tanks:
a. Comply with Section 303.1 of this rule.
b. Verify the proper connection to a vapor balance system or other vapor loss control systems
prior to an organic liquid transfer at facilities that utilize a vapor balance system.
c. Verify the proper disconnection from a vapor balance system or other vapor loss control
systems at the completion of an organic liquid transfer at facilities that utilize a vapor balance
system.
d. Minimize spills during storage and transfer of organic liquids.
e. Clean up spills as expeditiously as practicable.
f. Cover all open organic liquid containers when not in use.
g. Minimize organic liquid sent to open waste collection systems that collect and transport
organic liquid to reclamation and recycling devices, such as oil/water separators.
304.2 Transfer of Organic Liquids into Cargo Tanks:

a. Verify that the cargo tank has been demonstrated to be vapor tight.
b. Verify the proper connection to a vapor balance system or other vapor loss control systems
prior to an organic liquid transfer.
c. Verify the proper disconnection from a vapor balance system or other vapor loss control
systems at the completion of an organic liquid transfer.
d. Minimize spills during storage and transfer of organic liquids.
e. Clean up spills as expeditiously as practicable.
f. Cover all open organic liquid containers when not in use.
g. Minimize organic liquid sent to open waste collection systems that collect and transport
organic liquid to reclamation and recycling devices, such as oil/water separators.
309 ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS:
309.1 Prohibition – Floating Roof Openings: Floating roof tanks subject to the provisions of Section 306
or 307 of this rule shall have no visible holes, tears or other openings in the seal or in any seal
fabric. The accumulated area of gaps between a tank's wall and primary seal shall not exceed 10
square inches per foot of tank diameter (212 cm2 per meter) and the width of any portion of any
gap shall not exceed 1½ inches (3.8 cm). Where applicable, all openings except drains shall be
equipped with a cover seal or lid. The cover seal or lid shall be in a closed position at all times,
except when the device is in actual use. Automatic bleeder vents shall be closed at all times,
except when the roof is floated off or landed on the roof leg supports. Rim vents, if provided, shall
be set to open only when the roof is being floated off the roof leg supports or at the manufacturer's
recommended setting.
309.2 Tanks and all required emission control equipment shall be properly installed, properly maintained
and be properly operating.
310 EXEMPTIONS:
310.1 A pressure tank maintaining working pressure sufficient at all times to prevent organic vapor or
gas loss to the atmosphere is exempt from Sections 301, 302, 303, and 304 of this rule.
310.2 During the following periods a floating roof is exempt from the requirement that its roof be
floating: when the tank is being drained completely and when it is being filled, as long as both
processes are accomplished continuously and as rapidly as practicable.
310.3 A horizontal filling nozzle at its highest point within a floating roof tank exceeding 2,000,000
gallons (7,580,000 l) capacity may be up to 39.4 inches (1 meter) above the tank bottom if: except
when the tank is emptied completely, the nozzle is kept completely submerged, including when
the roof rests on its legs.
SECTION 400 – ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS
401 ANNUAL INSPECTIONS OF EXTERNAL FLOATING ROOF STATIONARY STORAGE TANKS:
The owner or operator of any tank which uses an external floating roof to meet the vapor loss control
requirements of this rule shall make the primary seal envelope and the secondary seal available for
unobstructed inspection by the Control Officer on an annual basis. The primary seal envelope shall be made
available for inspection at a minimum of four locations selected along its circumference at random by the
Control Officer. If the Control Officer detects a violation as a result of any such inspection, the Control
Officer may require such further unobstructed inspection of the seals as may be necessary to determine the
seal condition for its entire circumference.
402 ANNUAL INSPECTIONS OF INTERNAL FLOATING ROOF TANKS: The owner or operator of any
tank which uses an internal floating roof to meet the vapor loss control requirements of this rule shall make
the entire tank including the internal floating roof available for inspection prior to filling. It shall be made
available for visual inspection through the manholes or roof hatches on the fixed covering on an annual
basis.

403 FIVE-YEAR, FULL CIRCUMFERENCE INSPECTIONS: As of July 13, 1988, the owner or operator of a
floating roof tank of 20,000 gallons (75,700 l) or more storing an organic liquid with a TVP of 1.5 psia
(77.5 mm Hg) or greater shall make the primary seal envelope available for inspection by the Control
Officer for its full length every five years. However, if prior thereto the secondary seal is removed or if the
tank is drained and cleaned by the owner or operator for any reason, it shall be made available for such
inspection at that time. The owner or operator shall provide notification to the Control Officer no less than
seven working days prior to removal of the secondary seal. The owner or operator shall perform a complete
inspection of the primary seal and floating roof, including measurement of gap area and maximum gap,
whenever the tank is emptied for non-operational reasons or at least every five years, whichever is more
frequent.
404 SEMI-ANNUAL INSPECTIONS BY OWNER OR OPERATOR: The owner or operator of any floating
roof tank subject to this rule shall inspect the tank and seals at least once every six months to determine
ongoing compliance with both the applicable standards of this rule and any permit conditions pertaining to
the tank. Determinations of secondary seal gap area on external floating roofs need be made only once per
year. Records of these inspections shall be maintained and shall be made available to the Control Officer
upon request.
405 COMPLIANCE SCHEDULE: By October 6, 1992, any person subject to Section 300 who does not
comply with all its provisions shall submit to the Control Officer for approval an emission control plan
describing the method(s) to be used to achieve full compliance by October 6, 1993. This plan shall specify
dates for completing increments of progress, such as the contractual arrival date of new control equipment.
The Control Officer may require a person submitting such an emission control plan to submit subsequent
reports on progress in achieving compliance.
401 ORGANIC LIQUID (NON-GASOLINE) STATIONARY STORAGE TANK INSPECTIONS
401.1 Inspections Of External Floating Roof Stationary Storage Tanks:
a. The owner or operator of any external floating roof stationary storage tank subject to this rule
shall visually inspect the tank and seals at least once every six (6) months to determine
ongoing compliance with the applicable standards of this rule pertaining to the tank.
Determinations of secondary seal gap area on external floating roof stationary storage tanks
shall be made only once per year. Records of these inspections shall be maintained and shall
be made available to the Control Officer upon request.
b. Annual And Empty Tank Inspection: The owner or operator of any stationary storage tank
which uses an external floating roof to meet the vapor loss control system requirements of this
rule shall conduct a visual inspection each time the external floating roof stationary storage
tank is emptied and degassed or at least once a year. The visual inspection shall include all of
the following:
(1) Verify the secondary seal covers the space between the roof edge and the tank.
(2) Measure the gaps between the tank wall and the secondary seal. The accumulated area of
gaps between the tank wall and the secondary seal shall not exceed 21.2 cm2 (3.29
square inches) per meter of tank diameter and the width of any portion of any gap shall
not exceed 1.27 cm (0.2 inch).
(3) Verify there are no holes, tears, or other openings in the seal or seal fabric.
c. Five-Year, Full Circumference Inspections Of External Floating Roof Stationary
Storage Tanks: The owner or operator of any external floating roof stationary storage tank of
20,000 gallons (75,700 l) or more storing organic liquids (non-gasoline) shall conduct a
complete inspection of the external floating roof tank each time the tank is emptied and
degassed or at least once every five (5) years. This inspection can be performed while the tank
is in service. The inspection shall include all of the following:
(1) Perform a complete inspection of the organic liquid (non-gasoline) storage tank as
described in Section 401.1(a) of this rule.
(2) Perform a complete inspection of the primary seal and floating roof.

(3) Measure gap areas and maximum gap. The accumulated area of gaps between the tank
wall and the mechanical shoe or liquid-mounted primary seal shall not exceed 21.2 cm2
(39.9 square inches) per meter of tank diameter and the width of any portion of any gap
shall not exceed 3.81 cm (0.59 inch).
401.2 Inspections Of Internal Floating Roof Stationary Storage Tanks With A Fixed Covering:
a. The owner or operator of any internal floating roof stationary storage tank subject to this rule
shall visually inspect the tank and seals at least once every six (6) months to determine
ongoing compliance with the applicable standards of this rule pertaining to the tank. Records
of these inspections shall be maintained and shall be made available to the Control Officer
upon request.
b. The owner or operator of any stationary storage tank which uses an internal floating roof to
meet the vapor loss control system requirements of this rule shall conduct a visual inspection
each time the internal floating roof stationary storage tank is emptied and degassed or at least
once a year. The visual inspection can be made through manholes or rood hatches and shall
include all of the following:
(1) The internal floating roof shall not have an accumulation of liquid on the roof.
(2) The seal shall be attached.
(3) The seal shall not have any holes or tears.
401.3 Five Year Inspection and Empty Tank Inspection: The owner or operator of any stationary
storage tank which uses an internal floating roof to meet the vapor loss control system
requirements of this rule shall conduct a visual inspection each time the internal floating roof
stationary storage tank is emptied and degassed or at least once every five (5) years. The visual
inspection shall include all of the following:
a. The internal floating roof shall be free of any defects.
b. The primary seal shall not have any holes, tears or other openings.
c. The secondary seal if one is in service, shall not have any holes, tears or other openings.
d. Gaskets shall prevent liquid surfaces from exposure to atmosphere.
e. The slotted membrane shall not have more than a ten percent (10%) open area.
402 MONTHLY ORGANIC LIQUID TRANSFER EQUIPMENT LEAK INSPECTIONS: The owner or
operator shall perform monthly inspections, while organic liquid is being transferred, for liquid and vapor
leaks and for faulty equipment. Monthly inspections leak detection methods can include one or more of the
following methods:
402.1 Incorporation of sight, sound, smell and/or touch.
402.2 Use of a combustible gas detector (CGD) or organic vapor analyzer (OVA) pursuant to Section 501 of
this rule.
402.3 Method 21-Determination of Volatile Organic Compound Leaks, Alternative Screening Procedure
8.3.3, use of a soap solution pursuant to Section 501 of this rule.
402.4 Use of an optical gas imaging instrument calibrated according to manufacturing specifications and
used according to Section 501 of this rule.
403 ORGANIC LIQUID (NON-GASOLINE) STORAGE TANK INSPECTIONS-AVAILABILITY TO
CONTROL OFFICER:
403.1 Annual Inspections Of External Floating Roof Tanks: The owner or operator of any stationary
storage tank which uses an external floating roof to meet the vapor loss control system
requirements of this rule shall make the primary seal envelope and the secondary seal available for
unobstructed inspection by the Control Officer on an annual basis. The primary seal envelope shall
be made available for inspection at a minimum of four (4) locations selected along its

circumference at random by the Control Officer. If the Control Officer detects a violation as a
result of any such inspection, the Control Officer may require such further unobstructed inspection
of the seals as may be necessary to determine the seal condition for its entire circumference.
403.2 Annual Inspections Of Internal Floating Roof Tanks: The owner or operator of any stationary
storage tank which uses an internal floating roof to meet the vapor loss control
systemrequirements of this rule shall make the entire tank including the internal floating roof
available for inspection prior to filling. The internal floating roof shall be made available for visual
inspection through the manholes or roof hatches on the fixed covering on an annual basis.
403.3 Five-Year, Full Circumference Inspections: The owner or operator of a floating roof stationary
storage tank of 20,000 gallons (75,700 l) or more storing organic liquids (non-gasoline) shall make
the primary seal envelope available for inspection by the Control Officer for its full length every
five (5) years. This inspection can be performed while the tank is in-service. However, if the
secondary seal is removed or if the tank is drained and cleaned by the owner or operator for any
reason, it shall be made available for such inspection at that time. The owner or operator shall
provide notification to the Control Officer no less than seven (7) working days prior to removal of
the secondary seal.
404 OTHER AGENCIES’ REQUIREMENTS: Compliance with this rule does not relieve or otherwise affect
the owner’s or operator’s obligation to comply with any other applicable federal, state, or local legal
requirement including, but not limited to, rules promulgated by Arizona Department of Agriculture,
Weights and Measures Services Division, local fire department codes, and local zoning ordinances.
SECTION 500 – MONITORING AND RECORDS
501 VAPOR PRESSURE RECORDS: A person whose tanks are subject to the provisions of this rule shall keep
accurate records of liquids stored in such tanks including either the true or the Reid vapor pressure ranges
of each such liquid. The temperature of the contents of each affected tank located at bulk terminals shall be
recorded at least weekly and the true vapor pressure of each shall be recorded at least once each month.
These records shall be kept a minimum of three years.
502 COMPLIANCE DETERMINATION - TEST METHODS: When more than one test method is permitted
for a determination, an exceedance of the limits established in this rule determined by any of the applicable
test methods constitutes a violation of this rule.
502.1 Determination Of Vapor-Tight Condition: Applicable procedures of Rule 351, Section 501.
502.2 Emission Rates And Control Device Efficiency: EPA Reference Methods 2A, 2B, 18 and 25A.
502.3 Gaseous Leak Detection And Determination Of Gas-Tight Condition: EPA Method 21.
502.4 Reid Vapor Pressure: Reid vapor pressure shall be determined by ASTM Method D323-82 or by
ASTM Method D-5191.
502.5 True Vapor Pressure: True vapor pressure shall be determined by ASTM Method 2879-83 and by
temperature measurement under actual conditions using an instrument accurate to within ± 1
degree Fahrenheit or ± 0.5 degree Celsius. For purposes of recording and reporting, the Reid vapor
pressure and the foregoing temperature determination may be used in conjunction with the method
of American Petroleum Institute Bulletin 2517,February, 1980, to determine true vapor pressure,
unless the Control Officer specifies ASTM Method 2879-83.
501 MONITORING FOR LEAKS
501.1 Combustible Gas Detector (CGD) Or Organic Vapor Analyzer (OVA) – Test
Procedure: During the transfer of organic liquids into a cargo tank, the peripheries of all potential
sources of leakage at the organic liquid distribution facility are checked with a CGD or OVA as
follows:
a. Calibration: Within four (4) hours prior to monitoring, the CGD or OVA shall be properly
calibrated for a 20 percent lower explosive limit (LEL) response or to 10,000 ppm with methane.

b. Probe Distance: The probe inlet shall be one (1) inch (2.5 cm) or less from the potential leak
source when searching for leaks. The probe inlet shall be one (1) inch (2.5 cm) from the leak
source when the highest detector reading is being determined for a discovered leak. When the
probe is obstructed from moving within one (1) inch (2.5 cm) of an actual or potential leak
source, the closest practicable probe distance shall be used.
c. Probe Movement: The probe shall be moved slowly, not faster than 1.6 inches per second (4
centimeters per second). If there is any meter deflection at an actual or potential leak source, the
probe shall be positioned to locate the point of highest meter response.
d. Probe Position: The probe inlet shall be positioned in the path of the vapor flow from an actual
or potential leak such that the central axis of the probe-tube inlet shall be positioned coaxially
with the path of the most concentrated vapors.
e. Wind: Wind shall be blocked as much as possible from the space being monitored. The monthly
inspections leak detection tests required by Section 402 of this rule shall be valid only when wind
speed in the space being monitored is five (5) mph or less.
f. Data Recording: The highest detector reading and location for each incidence of detected
leakage shall be recorded along with the date and time. If no organic liquid vapor is detected, that
fact shall be entered into the record.
501.2 Method 21-Determination of Volatile Organic Compound Leaks, Alternative Screening
Procedure 8.3.3:
a. Spray a soap solution over all potential leak sources. The soap solution may be a
commercially available leak detection solution or may be prepared using concentrated
detergent and water. A pressure sprayer or squeeze bottle may be used to dispense the
solution.
b. Observe the potential leak sites to determine if any bubbles are formed.
(1) If no bubbles are observed, the source is presumed to have no detectable vapor leaks.
(2) If any bubbles are observed, the instrument techniques of Section 501.1 of this rule shall
be used to determine if a vapor leak exists.
501.3 Optical Gas Imaging: A certified operator of a calibrated optical gas imaging device may use an
optical gas imaging instrument to identify vapor leaks. If a vapor leak is detected, the instrument
techniques listed in Section 501.1 of this rule shall be used to determine if a vapor leak exists.
501.4 Any instrument used for the measurement of organic compound concentration shall be calibrated
according to manufacturer’s instructions or in accordance with EPA Reference Method 21 as
incorporated by reference in Maricopa County Air Pollution Control Regulations, Appendix G,
Incorporated Materials.
502 TVP RECORDS: The owner or operator of an organic liquid distribution facility shall keep accurate
records listed in Section 502 of this rule.
502.1 An owner or operator shall keep accurate records of organic liquids stored in each stationary
storage tank subject to this rule.
502.2 The temperature of the contents of each stationary storage tank subject to this rule shall be
determined and recorded using at least one of the following methods:
a. Take the actual temperature of the contents of the stationary storage tank each week and
record the weekly temperature of the contents of each stationary storage tank.
b. Obtain the maximum local monthly average ambient temperature as reported by the National
Weather Service and record monthly for each stationary storage tank.
c. Record monthly AP 42, Section 7.1 emission estimation procedures for each stationary
storage tank.

502.3 The TVP of each organic liquid in each stationary storage tank subject to this rule shall be
recorded at least once each month.
503 LEAK INSPECTION RECORDS: The owner or operator of an organic liquid distribution facility shall
keep a log documenting each leak inspection. The log shall include the items listed below:
503.1 The owner or operator shall sign the log at the completion of each monthly inspection for
equipment leaks.
503.2 Each monthly inspection log shall contain a list, summary description or diagram(s) showing the
location of all equipment at the organic liquid distribution facility.
503.3 Each monthly inspection log shall include any maintenance that occurred.
503.4 Each annual inspection log shall include any maintenance that occurred.
503.5 These records shall be kept a minimum of five (5) years.
503.6 Additional Record Requirements For Use Of Optical Gas Imaging Instruments: An owner or
operator using an optical gas imaging instrument for leak inspections shall date and time stamp the
video records of every monitoring event where an optical gas imaging instrument was used.
504 COMPLIANCE INSPECTIONS: The Control Officer, at any time, may monitor a cargo tank’s vapor
collection/processing system, an organic liquid transfer rack's vapor loss control system, an organic liquid
distribution facility, or a vapor collection/processing system for vapor leaks by the test methods described
in Section 506 of this rule.
505 RECORDS RETENTION: Records and information required by this rule shall be retained for at least five
(5) years.
502 506 COMPLIANCE DETERMINATION - TEST METHODS INCORPORATED BY
REFERENCE: The following test methods are approved for use for the purpose of determining
compliance with this rule. The test methods are incorporated by reference in Appendix G of the Maricopa
County Air Pollution Control Regulations. Alternative test methods as approved by the Administrator or
other EPA-approved test methods may be used upon prior written approval from the Control Officer. When
more than one test method is permitted for the same determination, an exceedance under any method will
constitute a violation. Copies of test methods referenced in this section are available at the Maricopa
County Air Quality Department, 1001 N. Central Avenue, Suite 125, Phoenix, AZ 85004-1942.
506.1 EPA Test Methods:
a. EPA Method 2A - Direct Measurement of Gas Volume through Pipes and Small Ducts.
b. EPA Method 18 - Measurement of Gaseous Organic Compound Emissions by Gas
Chromatography.
c. EPA Method 21 - Determination of Volatile Organic Compound Leaks.
d. EPA Method 21-Determination of Volatile Organic Compound Leaks, Alternative Screening
Procedure 8.3.3
e. EPA Method 25A - Determination of Total Gaseous Organic Concentration Using a Flame
Ionization Analyzer.
f. EPA Method 25B - Determination of Total Gaseous Organic Concentration Using a
Nondispersive Infrared Analyzer.
g. EPA Method 27 - Determination of Vapor Tightness of Gasoline Delivery Tank Using
Pressure Vacuum Test.
h. Optical Gas Imaging: Alternative Work Practice for Monitoring Equipment Leaks, 40 CFR
60.18(g). An owner or operator may use an Optical Gas Imaging instrument to comply with
the alternative work practice requirements in 40 CFR 40.18(g) instead of using the 40 CFR
60, Appendix A-7, Method 21 monitor to identify leaking equipment.

i. AP 42, Fifth Edition, Volume I, Chapter 7: Liquid Storage Tanks, November 2006, errata
August 2012.
506.2 California Air Resources Board (CARB) - Test Procedure:
a. TP-201.1E Leak Rate and Cracking Pressure of Pressure/Vacuum Vent Valves, October 8,
2003.
506.3 ASTM
a. ASTM D2879-10 Standard Test Method for Vapor Pressure-Temperature Relationship and
Initial Decomposition Temperature of Liquids by Isoteniscope.
b. ASTM D6420-99 (Reapproved 2004), Standard Test Method for Determination of Gaseous
Organic Compounds by Direct Interface Gas Chromatography-Mass Spectrometry.
506.4 American Petroleum Institute: API STD 650 Welded Tanks for Oil Storage, Twelfth Edition,
Includes Errata 1 (2013), Errata 2 (2014), and Addendum 1 (2014).
Last Formatted - Fall 1997

Return to list of attachments
MARICOPA COUNTY BOARD OF HEALTH MEETING MINUTES
Monday, April 25, 2016
301 W. Jefferson Street, 10th Floor
Phoenix, Arizona 85003
Board of Supervisors Conference Room
President Kip Steill called the meeting to order at 3:09 p.m.
ROLL CALL:
Members Present: Members Excused:
Don Cassano Scott Somers
Nedra Halley Francisca Montoya
Andrew Kunasek
Debra Baldauff
Kip Steill
Don Hughes
Robert MacMillan
Michael Mills, M.D. (via phone)
Ex-Officio: Bob England, M.D.
CALL TO THE PUBLIC:
Mr. Kip Steill announced it was time for a call to the public and requested public comment forms
for those who wanted to speak or who wanted to address any action items.
Supervisor Kunasek introduced the newest Board of Health member, Mr. MacMillan.
DISCUSSION/ACTION ITEMS
1. Election of Board of Health Vice President:
Mr. Don Hughes was nominated as Vice President of the Board of Health. A motion was made by
Mr. Don Cassano and seconded by Ms. Nedra Halley and all were in favor. The motion passed
unanimously.
2. Approval of Minutes: President Steill asked for a motion to approve the minutes from the BOH
Meeting held on January 25, 2016. Motion was made by Ms. Nedra Halley to approve the BOH
minutes as presented. Motion was seconded by Mr. Don Cassano and the motion passed
unanimously.
3. Approval of Public Health FY 17 OMB Budget Recommendation Mr. Scot Pitcairn
The Board of Health Finance Committee recommended that the Board of Health approve Public
Health’s FY 17 OMB Budget Recommendation. Mr. Pitcairn was available to answer any questions
that the Board of Health had. Motion was made by Mr. Don Hughes to approve Public Health’s FY
17 OMB budget recommendation. Motion was seconded by Mr. Don Cassano and the motion
passed unanimously.
4. Approval of Environmental Services FY 17 OMB Budget Recommendation Ms. Diane Cabanillas
The Board of Health Finance Committee recommended that the Board of Health approve
Environmental Services’ FY 17 OMB Budget Recommendation. Ms. Cabanillas was available to
answer any questions that the Board of Health had. Motion was made by Mr. Don Hughes to
1

approve Environmental Services FY 17 OMB budget recommendation. Motion was seconded by Mr.
Halley and the motion passed unanimously.
5. Approval of the initiation of regulatory change for the ozone-related Mr. Philip A. McNeely
rulemakings
The rules being revised regarding ozone are the following:
Rule 241: Minor New Source Review
Rule 322: Power Plant Operations
Rule 323: Fuel Burning Equipment from Industrial/Commercial/Institutional Sources
Rule 324: Stationary Internal Combustion (IC) Engines
Rule 336: Surface Coating Operations
Rule 342: Coating Wood Furniture and Fixtures
Rule 350: Storage of Organic Liquids at Bulk Plants and Terminals
Rule 351: Loading of Organic Liquids
Rule 352: Gasoline Delivery Vessel Testing and Use
Rule 353: Gasoline In Stationary Dispensing Tanks
These rules are being closed for public comment and will be published May 13th. If there is no
further comment, the rules will go to the Board of Supervisors for a hearing. These rules are in
regards to non-attainment for the ozone standards. These rules are due to the EPA January 1, 2017
and have gone through the EROP/stakeholder meeting process. Every facility that has a permit will
receive information when rule changes are occurring via email. For more information on the
regulatory process: http://www.maricopa.gov/regulations/default.aspx
Motion was made by Mr. Don Cassano to approve the initiation of regulatory change for the
ozone-related rulemakings. Motion was seconded by Ms. Nedra Halley and the motion passed
unanimously.
6. Fee Waiver Applications Mr. Ken Conklin
Mr. Ken Conklin presented thirty-two (32) fee waivers for review and consideration of approval. A
summary sheet document was provided.
Motion to approve the 32 Fee Waiver applications was made by Ms. Nedra Halley, seconded by
Mr. Don Cassano and all were in favor. Motion passed unanimously.
Discussion Items:
1. Public Health Report: Dr. Bob England
i. Human Resources
ii. Communication
iii. Infrastructure
iv. Strategic Planning
v. Programs
vi. Disease Update
vii. Future Topics
Dr. Bob provided the Board of Health with the updated Public Health org chart. The re-org has
aligned MCDPH into programmatic divisions. Previously, MCDPH was organized by funding stream.
Dr. Bob briefed the board on funding cuts that the department is receiving, including a $300,000
cut to WIC and $230,000 cut to the Office of Preparedness and Response (CDC is pulling some
money back for the Zika response). WIC is struggling to meet a target number of clients but each
time the program doesn’t meet the target, the number of target clients and funding is decreased.
The reason for difficulties with reaching the target number of client is that client encounter has
2

become increasingly more complex. The Office of Vital Records is moving their St. Mary’s Food
Bank location to a location near the 1-17 and Dunlap. MCDPH is no longer tracking returning
travelers from ebola stricken countries. Arizona has experienced the highest level of severity in the
country for flu for hospitalization and death rates. CDC is gathering data but there may not be
enough lab evidence to determine a cause. Zika virus is another of the flaviviruses that is associated
with significant neurological defects in infants whose mothers were infected with the virus in the
first two trimesters of pregnancy. The primary vector is Aedes Aegypti mosquitos. In Maricopa
County, there is no endemic spread of zika; only one travel associated case. The strategy when
there is a travel associated case is to have the individual stay inside, wear repellant, and when
necessary, have Environmental Services do traps and remediation depending on consent. There is
concern regarding the process and timeline it would take to enter private property if necessary to
spray for this type of mosquito. The Surgeon General will be visiting Arizona in May to do a tour on
opioid use. The NACCHO Annual meeting will be July 19 – 21 in Phoenix.
ANNOUNCEMENTS AND CURRENT EVENTS
 Next meeting is July 25, 2016
ADJOURNMENT: There being no further business, motion to adjourn the meeting was made by Mr.
Don Cassano, seconded by Ms. Halley and motion was passed unanimously. The meeting was
adjourned at 4:27 p.m.
3

Copies of all written and electronic Stakeholder input
Return to list of attachments

Return to list of attachments


Return to list of attachments
Executive Summary
of the Report to the Board of Supervisors
Prepared by the Maricopa County Air Quality Department
Board Hearing Date: November 2, 2016
Case #/Title: AQ-2015-008-Rule 351 (Loading of Organic Liquids)
Agenda Item:
Supervisor Districts: All Districts
The Maricopa County Air Quality Department (department) complied with all statutory and county policies
throughout this rulemaking process. Per the Enhanced Regulatory Outreach Program (EROP) Policy: “In addition
to the required staff report, an executive summary of the report including an overview of stakeholder input and
staff responses will be provided to the Board of Supervisors at least one week prior to any Board of Supervisors’
public hearing.”
Overview Of The Report To The Board Of Supervisors:
The department is requesting the Board of Supervisors to approve amendments to Maricopa County Air Pollution
Control Regulations regarding Rule 351 (Loading of Organic Liquids) and approve submitting the amended rules
as a revision to the (Arizona) State Implementation Plan (SIP).
The purpose of this rulemaking is to separate the gasoline requirements from the organic liquids (non-gasoline).
The organic liquid (non-gasoline) transfer requirements are included in Rule 350. The gasoline storage
requirements in Rule 350 are being consolidated into Rule 351. These rule revisions update and clarify the County
regulatory requirements and authority for both the gasoline industry and the organic liquid (non-gasoline)
industry. In addition, the revisions to Rule 351 address the requirements of the SIP for “moderate” nonattainment
for the 2008 eight-hour ozone national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS). The proposed amendments in Rule
351 include Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT) for volatile organic compounds (VOCs).
Overview Of Stakeholder Input And Staff Responses:
Three Stakeholder Workshops were held: June 30, 2015, September 14, 2015, and February 22, 2016. Workshop
discussions included the following:
• Clarification of the rule’s applicability to gasoline
• Clarification and applicability of terms to be consistent throughout the department’s rules pertaining to gasoline
• Clarification of tank inspections
• Clarification of the intent of the weekly monitoring requirement under vapor pressure records
• Clarification of the “horizontal fill” pipe maximum height from the rule
A 30-day comment period was held May-June 2016. During the 30-day comment period, the department received
one written comment from Kinder Morgan/SFPP. They inquired about the basis for requiring recording the
pressure once every one (1) minute while a gasoline truck is being loaded during performance testing; instead the
recording should be made every five (5) minutes to match federal requirements.
The department discussed the comment with Kinder Morgan/SFPP and the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) and reviewed the federal requirements. Kinder Morgan/SFPP stated that the back pressure is
continuously monitored by the source test contractor while a gasoline truck is being loaded during performance
testing and that the instantaneous reading at the five (5)-minute mark and the maximum instantaneous reading
during the last five (5) minutes are recorded. The federal requirements (40 CFR Subpart XX Section
60.503(d)(2)) state that during the performance test, the pressure shall be recorded every five (5) minutes while a
gasoline truck is being loaded and the highest instantaneous pressure that occurs during each loading shall be

recorded. The federal requirements also state that during performance testing, the gauge pressure standard must be
complied-with.
After considering the comments, reviewing the federal requirements, and reviewing the text as proposed in draft
Rule 351, the department is proposing to change the requirement for recording pressure every one (1) minute
while a gasoline truck is being loaded during performance testing to every five (5) minutes. This requirement is
consistent with the federal requirement in 40 CFR Subpart XX, Section 60.503(d)(2). With this change, the
department is proposing that draft Rule 351 is no less stringent than the SIP-approved rule. Draft Rule 351 is
being clarified to match federal requirements.
This change has been incorporated into the draft rule and is explained in the Preamble of the Draft Notice of Final
Rulemaking.

Return to list of attachments
Report to the Board of Supervisors
Prepared by the Maricopa County Air Quality Department
Board of Health Meeting Date: April 25, 2016
Board Hearing Date: November 2, 2016
Case #/Title: AQ-2015-008-Rule 351 (Loading Of Organic Liquids)
Agenda Item:
Supervisor Districts: All Districts
Applicant: Staff
Request: Approve amendments to Maricopa County Air Pollution Control
Regulations regarding Rule 351 (Loading of Organic Liquids) and
approve submitting the amended rule as a revision to the (Arizona) State
Implementation Plan (SIP).
The purpose of this rulemaking is to separate the gasoline requirements
from the organic liquids (non-gasoline). The organic liquid (non-
gasoline) transfer requirements are included in amended Rule 350
(Storage Of Organic Liquids At Bulk Plants And Bulk Terminals). The
gasoline storage requirements currently in Rule 350 are being
consolidated into Rule 351. These rule revisions update and clarify the
County regulatory requirements and authority for both the gasoline
industry and the organic liquid (non-gasoline) industry. In addition, the
revisions to Rule 351 address the requirements of the SIP for “moderate”
nonattainment for the 2008 eight-hour ozone national ambient air quality
standard (NAAQS). The proposed amendments in Rule 351 include
Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT) for volatile organic
compounds (VOCs).
Support/Opposition: During the 30-day comment period, the department received one written
comment from Kinder Morgan/SFPP; they stated their opinion as
“support” or “other”. Kinder Morgan/SFPP inquired about the basis for
requiring recording the pressure once every one (1) minute while a
gasoline truck is being loaded during performance testing; instead the
recording should be made every five (5) minutes to match federal
requirements.
The department discussed the comment with Kinder Morgan/SFPP and
the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and reviewed the
federal requirements. Kinder Morgan/SFPP stated that the back pressure
is continuously monitored by the source test contractor while a gasoline
truck is being loaded during performance testing and that the
instantaneous reading at the five (5)-minute mark and the maximum
instantaneous reading during the last five (5) minutes are recorded. The
federal requirements (40 CFR Subpart XX Section 60.503(d)(2)) state
that during the performance test, the pressure shall be recorded every five
(5) minutes while a gasoline truck is being loaded and the highest
instantaneous pressure that occurs during each loading shall be recorded.
The federal requirements also state that during performance testing, the
gauge pressure standard must be complied-with.

After considering the comments, reviewing the federal requirements, and
reviewing the text as proposed in draft Rule 351, the department is
proposing to change the requirement for recording pressure every one (1)
minute while a gasoline truck is being loaded during performance testing
to every five (5) minutes. This requirement is consistent with the federal
requirement in 40 CFR Subpart XX, Section 60.503(d)(2). With this
change, the department is proposing that draft Rule 351 is no less
stringent than the SIP-approved rule. Draft Rule 351 is being clarified to
match federal requirements.
This change has been incorporated into the draft rule and is explained in
the Preamble of the Draft Notice of Final Rulemaking.
Staff
Recommendation: Approve
Board of Health
Recommendation: Approve per Staff recommended language
Additional
Comments: This regulatory change is following the Enhanced Regulatory Outreach
Program (EROP) Policy and workflow process. The County Manager
briefed the Board of Supervisors regarding this rulemaking in May 2015.
Stakeholder workshops were held June 2015 through February 2016. On
April 25, 2016, the Board of Health approved this regulatory change for
the Expedited Process.
Presented By: Philip A. McNeely, R.G., Director
Prepared By: Hether Krause
Attachments: Summary of the proposed regulatory change (See Item 6 of the Draft
Notice of Final Rulemaking)
Analysis of input received during the process and how that input was
responded to (See Item 13 of the Draft Notice of Final Rulemaking)
Language of proposed regulatory change or amendment (See Item 17 of
the Draft Notice of Final Rulemaking)
Preamble required by Arizona Revised Statutes (A.R.S.) § 49-471.05
(See Draft Notice of Final Rulemaking)
Minutes from Board of Health meeting
Copies of all written and electronic Stakeholder input
Signed copy of the Maricopa County Resolution “Moratorium on
Increased Regulatory Burdens”

DRAFT NOTICE OF FINAL RULEMAKING
MARICOPA COUNTY AIR POLLUTION CONTROL REGULATIONS
REGULATION III – CONTROL OF AIR CONTAMINANTS
RULE 351: LOADING OF ORGANIC LIQUIDS
Return to list of attachments
PREAMBLE
1. Rule affected Rulemaking action
Rule 351: Loading of Organic Liquids Amended
2. Statutory authority for the rulemaking:
Authorizing statutes: A.R.S. §§ 49-474, 49-479, and 49-480
Implementing Statute: A.R.S. § 49-112
3. The effective date of the rule:
Tentative date of adoption: November 2, 2016
4. List of public notices addressing this rulemaking:
Notice of Briefing to Maricopa County Manager: May 2015
Notice of Stakeholder Workshops: June 30, 2015, September 14, 2015, and February 22, 2016
Notice of Maricopa County Board of Health Meeting: April 25, 2016
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking: 22 A.A.R. 1224, May 13, 2016
5. Name and address of department personnel with whom persons may communicate regarding the
rulemaking:
Name: Cheri Dale or Hether Krause
Maricopa County Air Quality Department
Planning and Analysis Division
Address: 1001 N Central Avenue, Suite 125
Phoenix, Arizona 85004
Telephone: (602) 506-6010
Fax: (602) 506-6179
E-mail: aqplanning@mail.maricopa.gov Return to list of attachments
6. Explanation of the rule, including the department's reasons for initiating the rulemaking:
Summary: Rule 351 limits the emission of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) from organic liquids under
actual loading conditions. The rule is applicable to the transfer of organic liquids having a true vapor
pressure of 1.5 psia or greater under actual loading conditions. The rule regulates the transfer of organic
liquids from a stationary storage tank located at a bulk plant or bulk terminal into and out of delivery
vessels. Rule 351 applies to both the organic liquid (non-gasoline) and the gasoline industries.
Rule 351 was last revised over twenty-five years ago. Technologies have changed over time. The gasoline
industry and the organic liquid (non-gasoline) industry and use different terminology, definitions and
methods of operation. Revisions in Rule 351 included the separation of gasoline requirements from the
organic liquids (non-gasoline). The organic liquid (non-gasoline) transfer requirements are included in Rule
350 (Storage of Organic Liquids at Bulk Plants and Bulk Terminals). The gasoline storage requirements
currently in Rule 350 were moved to Rule 351. These rule revisions updated and clarified the county
regulatory requirements and authority for the both the gasoline industry and the organic liquid (non-
gasoline) industry. In addition, the revisions to Rule 351 addressed the requirements of the State

Implementation Plan (SIP) for “moderate” nonattainment for the 2008 eight-hour ozone national ambient
air quality standard (NAAQS).
In addition, the amendments corrected typographical or other clerical errors; made minor grammatical
changes to improve readability or clarity; modified the format, numbering, order, capitalization,
punctuation, or syntax of certain text to increase standardization within and among rules; or made various
other minor changes of a purely editorial nature. As these changes did not alter the sense, meaning, or
effect of the rules, they are not described in detail here, but can be readily discerned in the “underline/
strikeout” version of the rules contained in Item 17 of this notice.
Background: As early at the 1960’s, the Maricopa County Health Department (as the department was then
called), Air Pollution Control regulations, Section IV, Handling of Materials, Regulation 1, required
“Material such as…gasoline or other volatile compounds…be kept, processed, used, and transported in
such a manner and by such means that they will not unreasonably leak, escape, evaporate or be otherwise
discharged into the ambient air so as to cause or contribute to air pollution…”1 This early rulemaking
established the basis for the current Rule 350. In 1970, the passage of the Clean Air Act established federal
air quality standards.
Congress established the basic structure of the Clean Air Act (CAA) in 1970. The CAA requires the U.S.
Environment Protection Agency (EPA) to establish national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) for
common and widespread pollutants based on the most current science available. For areas that were
determined to be in nonattainment of the NAAQS, the state was required to adopt federally enforceable
state implementation plans (SIP) in order to achieve and maintain air quality and meet the federally
established air quality standards (the NAAQS)2. The states were responsible for developing and
implementing rules that require reasonably available control technology (RACT) for sources of VOCs
located in the designated ozone nonattainment areas. Local air agencies were required to establish RACT
for source categories not already covered by EPA's Control Techniques Guidelines (CTGs) as well as
tighten RACT for source categories for which RACT had already been defined in the NAAQS3. EPA
defined RACT as “the lowest emission limitation that a particular source is capable of meeting by the
application of control technology that is reasonably available considering technological and economic
feasibility” (44 FR 53762; September 17, 1979).
In the 1970’s, using the EPA NAAQS and CTGs to identify the established RACT standards, the Maricopa
County Bureau of Air Pollution Control (as the department was then called) revised and renumbered the
county air pollution rules and regulations. The revised county rules established specific requirements for
petroleum products in Regulation III, Rule 33: Storage and Handling of Petroleum Products4. This rule
established requirements to control vapor loss during storage; submerged filling of tanks; loading dock
requirements; and leak proof fill pipe connections.
On March 3, 1978, EPA promulgated a list of ozone nonattainment areas under the provisions of the Clean
Air Act, as amended in 1977 (1977 CAA or pre-amended Act). Maricopa County was included on such list
43 FR 8964, March 3, 1978). On February 24, 1984, EPA notified the Governor of Arizona, that the
Maricopa County Air Pollution Control District’s (MCAPCD), as the department was then called) portion
of the Arizona SIP was inadequate and requested that deficiencies in the existing SIP be corrected (EPA's
SIP-Call, 49 FR 18827, May 3, 1984). The department was in the process of revising Rule 33 to create
Rules 350, 351, 352, and 353 to address the RACT requirements when EPA again notified the Governor of
Arizona (May 26, 1988) that MCAPCD's portion of the Arizona SIP was inadequate and requested that
deficiencies relating to VOC controls and the application of RACT in the existing SIP be corrected (EPA's
second SIP-Call, 53 FR 34500, September 7, 1988).
On November 15, 1990, the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 were enacted. In an amended section of
the CAA, Congress statutorily adopted the requirement that nonattainment areas fix their deficient RACT
rules and established a deadline of May 15, 1991 for states to submit corrections of those deficiencies. The
department further revised Rules 350, 351, 352, and 353 to meet the RACT standards. Rule 350 (Storage of
Organic Liquids at Bulk Plants), revised July 13, 1988, and April 6, 1992, was approved by the EPA
effective October 5, 1995 (60 FR 46024). Rule 351(Loading Organic Liquids) revised July 13, 1988 and
November 16, 1992, was approved effective October 5, 1995 (60 FR 46024). Rule 352 (Gasoline Delivery
Vessel Testing and Use), revised July 13, 1988, and November 16, 1992, was approved effective October

5, 1995, (60 FR 46024). Rule 353 (Transfer of Gasoline into Stationary Dispensing Tanks) revised July 13,
1988, and April 6, 1992, was approved effective March 4, 1996 (61 FR 3578).
More recently, EPA developed national emission standards for hazardous air pollutants (NESHAPS) for
Source Category: Gasoline Distribution Bulk Terminals, Bulk Plants, and Pipeline Facilities (73 FR 1933,
Jan. 10, 2008); a NESHAP for Gasoline-Dispensing Facilities (73 FR 1945, Jan. 10, 2008); and the
NESHAP for Organic Liquid Distribution (non-gasoline) (69 FR 5063, Feb. 3, 2004). These NESHAPS are
often referred to as the maximum achievable control technology (MACT) standards since they were
developed to reflect the maximum achievable degree of HAP emission reduction. New MACT standards
required additional or new emissions testing requirements reflecting the new technologies. New and revised
test methods and leak detection methods were required in these MACT standards. Although the MACT
standards typically apply to large sources, there are test methods and other good practices that are or may
be applicable to small area sources of VOC emissions.
Rule 351 Background: The department originally adopted Rule 351(Loading of Organic Liquids) and
Rule 350 (Storage of Organic Liquids at Bulk Plants and Terminals) to be inclusive of both gasoline and
non-gasoline organic liquids. The purpose of the rules was to control the emission of volatile organic
compounds (VOCs) from all organic liquids. These rules were required in order for the county to comply
with the reasonably available control technology (RACT) documents and other policy statements published
by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Since that time, the gasoline industry and the organic
liquid (non-gasoline) have evolved into two distinct industries. The use of different terminology, definitions
and methods of operation have created confusion in the applicability of Rule 351 to each industry. In this
rulemaking, the department drafted rules specific to the gasoline storage and distribution industry and for
the organic liquid (non-gasoline) storage and distribution industry. This rulemaking did not propose new
rules for the industries but rather revisions to current rules that improved the clarity and enforceability of
the regulatory requirements for each industry.
The revisions included the separation of the gasoline requirements and the organic liquid (non-gasoline)
requirements in Rule 351. The gasoline storage requirements from Rule 350 and the gasoline loading
requirements in Rule 351 were combined and included into one rule, Rule 351. The organic liquid (non-
gasoline) loading requirements in Rule 351 were moved into Rule 350. Along with separation of the two
industry requirements, the department retitled the rule to reflect the rule revisions.
On May 19, 1993, the department issued technical guidance #TG-003 to address a Stakeholder concern that
Section 301.2 of Rule 350 requiring a tank to have a pressure vacuum valve set to within 10% of the tank’s
maximum, safe working pressure. The Stakeholder provided documentation stating the design working
pressure should not exceed 1 psig and recommended applying the ½ psia operating pressure as CARB
required. Revisions to Rule 351 provided the owner or operator the option of either setting the
pressure/vacuum valve on fixed roof tanks within 10% of the tank’s maximum working pressure or at 0.5
psia, as included in revised Section 302(c) of Rule 351. The department rescinded #TG-003 (May 19, 1993)
with this rule revision.
A second technical guidance was issued on March 11, 1998 #TG98-002, addressing the requirement of
pressure/vacuum (P/V) valves on both fixed roof and floating roof tanks. Per the discussion in the
document:
Both floating-roof tanks and pressure-tanks are designed and engineered to control vapor
emissions without the use of pressure/vacuum valves. The use of such a valve would not produce
additional emissions control. The rule’s authors had no intention of requiring P/V valves on
floating roof tanks or pressure tanks, but failed to recognize that the way they constructed the rule
would result in this unintended and erroneous interpretation.
The guidance concluded “The subsection 301.2 requirement to have a pressure/vacuum valve does not
apply to floating roof tanks or pressure tanks.” The department revised Rule 351, Section 302.2(c) to
require pressure/vacuum valves on “Each fixed roof stationary storage tank…” This rule revision corrects
the error in the previous rule. The department rescinded #TG98-002 (March 11, 1998) with this rule
revision.
Other revisions included the relocation of any exemptions to Section 100, the deletion of definitions and
terms specific to the organic liquid (non-gasoline) industry, the inclusion of definitions specific to the

gasoline industry and in line with terms defined in 40 CFR 63.11100 (Gasoline Distribution Bulk Terminal,
Bulk Plants and Pipeline Facilities NESHAP), clarified the regulatory requirements for storing and loading
gasoline at bulk plants and bulk terminals, added monthly equipment leak inspection requirement, and
added optical gas imaging as an alternative work practice to monitor and identify leaking equipment.
The department also included the recommendations set forth in the Maricopa Environmental Quality, Air
Pollution Control Division, Technical Guidance TG-003, May 19, 1993, to clarify the vapor vent/vacuum
valve requirement at bulk plants and bulk terminals.
Issues Raised and Discussed During This Rulemaking Process:
The department held three Stakeholder workshops: June 29, 2015, September 14, 2016, and February 22,
2016. Stakeholders included representatives from APS, Caljet, CDM Smith, Cemex, City of Glendale, City
of Mesa, City of Phoenix, Coastal Transport, EnCore Consulting, Envirosure Solutions, Kiewit, Kinder
Morgan, Luke Air Force Base, Pinal County, Ping, Polar Services, SRP, Tamura Environmental,
Washington Elementary School, and EPA.
Rule 351 is applicable to the storage of gasoline and the loading of gasoline at bulk plants and bulk
terminals. Stakeholders questioned if the rule was only applicable to gasoline. Per one Stakeholder the
proposed rule does rule did not take into account other petroleum products such as denatured ethanol and
transmix, a mixture of refined petroleum products such as gasoline, diesel, and/or jet fuel. There is a wide
variety of other petroleum products. The department defined gasoline in the rule as having a Reid vapor
pressure between 4.0 and 14.7 psi and used as a fuel for internal combustion engines. If a petroleum
product meets the definition of gasoline as defined in the rule, then the rule is applicable.
The terms VAPOR COLLECTION/PROCESSING SYSTEM and VAPOR LOSS CONTROL DEVICE
were used inconsistently within the rule. A vapor balance system is different than a vapor loss control
system. A vapor balance system is a system that is designed to capture the VOC emissions that occur
during the loading of gasoline cargo tanks. No destruction of the VOC emissions occurs during this type of
loading process. A vapor loss control system is a system that collects the VOC emissions and uses an
abatement device to reduce the VOC emissions. The department deleted the definition of VAPOR
COLLECTION/PROCESSING SYSTEM and VAPOR LOSS CONTROL DEVICE; added the definition
of a VAPOR BALANCE SYSTEM and VAPOR LOSS CONTROL SYSTEM; and revised sections
throughout the rule that referred to VAPOR COLLECTION/PROCESSING SYSTEM and VAPOR LOSS
CONTROL DEVICE.
The current definitions of BULK TANK and BULK TERMINAL were confusing. Stakeholders
recommended clarification and applicability of terms to be consistent throughout the department’s rules
pertaining to gasoline. The department revised the terms to be consistent with other department rules
pertaining to gasoline.
Stakeholders requested the addition or revision of numerous definitions to reflect the rule applicability to
the gasoline industry, specifically to include a definition for LEAK or LEAK FREE and PURGING. A
request was made to clarify the definitions VAPOR TIGHT and GAS TIGHT. The department revised the
definitions in the rule.
In Section 400, the owner or operator “shall make the primary seal envelope available for inspection by the
Control Officer for its full length every five years.” Stakeholders questioned if it was Maricopa County’s
intention to perform the inspection when the tank is in service or out of service? Did this requirement
apply to internal floating roof tanks as well? Per discussions with the Stakeholder, the primary seal
envelope can be inspected when the tank is “in-service.” The department will not require the floating roof
tank to be emptied prior to each five-year inspection if the primary seal envelope is available for inspection
by the Control Officer. The department clarified the section to reflect the requested requirements.
Stakeholders questioned the intent of the weekly monitoring requirement under vapor pressure records.
Monitoring the product temperature on a weekly basis for a facility that has more than 70 tanks requires a
great deal of manpower and coordination. TVP of products stored in storage tanks operated at ambient
temperature are typically calculated using meteorological data provided in the EPA TANKS 4.0 database.
Stakeholders requested that the department reduce the monitoring requirement from weekly to monthly.
The requirement for weekly monitoring of temperature came from Rule 350, Section 501. Reducing the

temperature monitoring to once a month may be considered a relaxation of current rule; therefore, the
department did not reduce the frequency of the current weekly requirement. The department did add an
option to use the maximum local monthly average ambient temperature as reported by the National
Weather Service and record monthly for each storage tank in Section 503.1.b(2).
The department originally proposed to remove the “horizontal fill” pipe maximum height of 39” from the
rule. Per Stakeholder comment, at least one terminal has multiple bulk gasoline storage tanks with side fill
pipes that would exceed the originally proposed maximum height of 18”. These tanks were built between
the 1950’s and the 1990’s. The Stakeholder suggested referencing the American Petroleum Institute storage
tank design specifications API Standard 650, Welded Tanks for Oil Storage, 12th Edition, 2013. The
department deleted the “horizontal fill pipe” requirements and wording from the rule. To accommodate fill
pipes that are over 18” from the bottom of the tank, the department added an option for the gasoline storage
tank to be API Standard 650 Compliant.
Description of Amendments:
Amended the following throughout the rule:
 Revised the title of the rule to: STORAGE AND LOADING OF GASOLINE AT BULK GASOLINE
PLANTS AND BULK GASOLINE TERMINALS
 Deleted references to organic liquid loading and storage
 Deleted the term “transfer” and replaced with the term “loading”
 Changed the term “delivery vessel” to “gasoline cargo tank”
 Deleted the word “person” and inserted the words “owner or operator”
 Deleted past compliance dates
 Added or revised specific rule section references
Amended the following in Section 100:
 Revised Section 101 (Purpose) to include the storage and loading of gasoline
 Revised Section 102 (Applicability) to apply to the bulk storage and loading of gasoline
 Added Section 103 (Exemptions)
Amended the following in Section 200:
 Deleted the definition BULK PLANT
 Added the definition AVIATION GASOLINE (AVgas)
 Added the definition BULK GASOLINE PLANT
 Revised the definition BULK TANK
 Revised the definition BULK TERMINAL
 Deleted the definition DELIVERY VESSEL
 Revised the definition DISPENSING TANK
 Revised the definition EXCESS ORGANIC LIQUID DRAINAGE
 Added the definition EXTERNAL FLOATING ROOF STATIONARY STORAGE TANK
 Deleted the definition FUGITIVE LIQUID LEAK
 Revised the definition GASOLINE
 Added the definition GASOLINE CARGO TANK
 Revised the definition GASOLINE DISPENSING OPERATION
 Revised the definition LOADING FACILITY

 Added the definition INTERNAL FLOATING ROOF STATIONARY STORAGE TANK WITH
FIXED ROOF COVERING
 Added the definition LEAK FREE
 Deleted the definition OFFSET FILL LINE
 Added the definition PURGING
 Revised the definition STATIONARY STORAGE TANK
 Revised the definition SUBMERGED FILL PIPE
 Revised the definition SWITCH LOADING
 Deleted the definition TRUE VAPOR PRESSURE
 Added the definition VAPOR BALANCE SYSTEM
 Deleted the definition VAPOR COLLECTION/PROCESSING SYSTEM
 Deleted the definition VAPOR LOSS CONTROL DEVICE
 Added the definition VAPOR LOSS CONTROL SYSTEM
 Revised the definition VAPOR TIGHT
Amended the following in Section 300:
 Deleted Section 301: General Requirements for Loading Facilities
 Deleted Section 302: Operating Requirements for Vapor Loss Control Devices
 Deleted Section 303: Repair and Retesting Requirement
 Deleted Section 304: Equipment Maintenance and Operating Practices
 Deleted Section 305: Exemptions
 Added Section 301: Federal Standards of Performance For Bulk Gasoline Plants And Bulk Gasoline
Terminals
 Added Section 302: Gasoline Stationary Storage Tank Standards
 Added Section 302.1: Submerged Fill
 Added Section 302.2: Gasoline Stationary Storage Tanks with a Capacity Between 250 Gallons (946 l)
and 40,000 Gallons (151,400 L)
 Added Section 302.3: Gasoline Storage Tanks with a Capacity Equal to or Greater than 40,000 Gallons
(151,400 L)
 Added Section 303: Vapor Loss Control
 Added Section 303.1: External Floating Roof Storage Tanks
 Added Section 303.2: Internal Floating Roof Stationary Storage Tank with Fixed Roof Covering
 Added Section 303.3: Vapor Balance System
 Added Section 303.4: Vapor Loss Control System
 Added Section 303.5: Equipment Maintenance, Operation and Repair
 Added Section 304: General Requirements For The Loading Of Gasoline
 Added Section 304: General Requirements for the Loading of Gasoline
 Added Section 304.1: Loading of Gasoline into Stationary Storage Tank
 Added Section 304.2: Loading of Gasoline into Cargo Tankers

 Added Section 304.3: Loading of Gasoline at a Bulk Gasoline Plant
 Added Section 304.4: Loading of Gasoline at Bulk Gasoline Terminal
 Added Section 305: Operating Requirements for Vapor Loss Control Devices
Amended the following in Section 400:
 Revised Section 401: Equipment Leaks
 Deleted Section 402: Compliance Schedule
 Added Section 402: Gasoline Storage Tank Inspections
 Added Section 402.1: Semi-Annual Inspection by an Owner or Operator
 Added Section 402.2: Inspection of External Floating Roof Stationary Storage Tank
 Added Section 402.3: Inspection of Internal Floating Roof Stationary Storage Tanks with a Fixed Roof
Covering
 Added Section 403: Performance Testing
 Added Section 404: Gasoline Storage Tank Inspections-Availability to Control Officer
 Added Section 404.1 Annual Inspections of External Floating Roof Tanks
 Added Section 404.2 Annual Inspections of Internal Floating Roof Stationary Storage Tanks with a
Fixed Roof Covering
 Added Section 404.3 Five-Year, Full Circumference Inspections
 Added Section 405: Other Agency’s Requirements
Amended the following in Section 500:
 Revised Section 500: Monitoring and Records
 Deleted Section 501: Leak Detection-Test Procedure
 Deleted Section 501.1: Pressure
 Added Section 501: Monitoring For Leaks
 Added Section 501.1: Combustible Gas Detector or Organic Vapor Analyzer (OVA) –Test Procedure
 Renumbered Section 501.2: Calibration to Section 501.1(a)
 Renumbered Section 501.3: Probe Distance to Section 501.1(b)
 Renumbered Section 501.4: Probe Movement to Section 501.1(c)
 Renumbered Section 501.5: Probe Positions to Section 501.1(d)
 Renumbered Section 501.6: Wind to Section 501.1(e)
 Renumbered Section 501.2: Data Recording to Section 501.1(f)
 Added Section 501.2: Method 21-Determination of Volatile Organic Compound Leaks, Alternative
Screening Procedure 8.3.3
 Added Section 501.3: Optical Gas Imaging
 Revised Section 502: Compliance Inspections
 Revised Section 503: Record Retention
 Added Section 503.1: Vapor Pressure Records
 Added Section 503.2: Leak Inspection Records
 Revised Section 504: Compliance Determination-Test Methods

 Deleted Section 504.1: Vapor Collection/Processing System
 Deleted Section 504.2: Vapor Balance and Loading Systems
 Deleted Section 504.3: True Vapor Pressure
 Deleted Section 504.4: Reid Vapor Pressure
 Added Section 504.1 EPA Test Methods
 Added Section 504.2 California Air Resources Board (CARB) Test Procedures:
 Added Section 504.3 ASTM Standards
 Added Section 504.4 American Petroleum Institute Standard API STD 650 Welded Tanks for Oil
Storage
6. Demonstration of compliance with A.R.S. §49-112:
Under A.R.S. § 49-479(C), a county may not adopt a rule or ordinance that is more stringent than the rules
adopted by the Director of the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ) for similar sources
unless it demonstrates compliance with the applicable requirements of A.R.S. §49-112.
§ 49-112 County regulation; standards
§ 49-112(A)
When authorized by law, a county may adopt a rule, ordinance or other regulation that is more stringent
than or in addition to a provision of this title or rule adopted by the director or any board or commission
authorized to adopt rules pursuant to this title if all of the following conditions are met:
1. The rule, ordinance or other regulation is necessary to address a peculiar local condition.
2. There is credible evidence that the rule, ordinance or other regulation is either;
(a) Necessary to prevent a significant threat to public health or the environment that results from a
peculiar local condition and is technically and economically feasible.
(b) Required under a federal statute or regulation, or authorized pursuant to an intergovernmental
agreement with the federal government to enforce federal statutes or regulations if the county rule,
ordinance or other regulation is equivalent to federal statutes or regulation.
3. Any fee or tax adopted under the rule, ordinance or other regulation will not exceed the reasonable
costs of the county to issue and administer that permit or plan approval program.
§ 49-112(B)
When authorized by law, a county may adopt rules, ordinances or other regulations in lieu of a state
program that are as stringent as a provision of this title or rule adopted by the director or any board or
commission authorized to adopt rules pursuant to this title if the county demonstrates that the cost of
obtaining permits or other approvals from the county will approximately equal or be less than the fee or
cost of obtaining similar permits or approvals under this title or any rule adopted pursuant to this title. If the
state has not adopted a fee or tax for similar permits or approvals, the county may adopt a fee when
authorized by law in the rule, ordinance or other regulation that does not exceed the reasonable costs of the
county to issue and administer that permit or plan approval program.
The department complies with A.R.S. § 49-112(A) in that Maricopa County fails to meet the National
Ambient Air Quality Standards for both ozone and particulates. The County failed to meet 2008 8-hour
ozone standard by the marginal area attainment date of July 20, 2015. The EPA issued a final rule, effective
June 3, 2016, reclassifying the Maricopa County area to “moderate” (published at 86 FR 26697, May 4,
2016). Further, a portion of the County was classified as a serious ozone nonattainment area under the
previous 1-hour ozone standard requiring the County to continue to maintain the measures and
requirements that allowed the county to attain that standard. Currently, a portion of Maricopa County and
Apache Junction in Pinal County is designated serious nonattainment for the PM10 24-hour standard. This
is the only serious PM10 nonattainment area in Arizona. Revisions to Rule 350 address the requirements of

the State Implementation Plan (SIP) for “moderate” nonattainment for the 2008 eight-hour ozone national
ambient air quality standard (NAAQS). The amendments in Rule 351 include Reasonably Available
Control Technology (RACT).
The department complies with A.R.S. § 49-112(B) in that the amendments to Rule 351 are not more
stringent than or in addition to a provision of Title 49 or rule adopted by the director or any board or
commission authorized to adopt rules pursuant to Title 49, address the peculiar local conditions in
Maricopa County, are authorized under A.R.S. Title 49, Chapter 3, Article 3, and are not in lieu of a state
program.
8. Documents or studies referenced and/or reviewed for this rulemaking:
Not applicable
9. Showing of good cause why the rule is necessary to promote a statewide interest if the rule will
diminish a previous grant of authority of a political subdivision:
Not applicable
10. Summary of the economic, small business, and consumer impact:
The following discussion addresses each of the elements required for an economic, small business and
consumer impact statement under A.R.S. § 41-1055. The economic summary is based on the number of
Title V and Non-Title V permits issued by the Maricopa County Air Quality Department.
An identification of the rulemaking.
This rulemaking revised Rule 351 (Loading of Organic Liquids). The revised Rule will be titled: Storage
and Loading of Gasoline at Bulk Gasoline Plants and Bulk Gasoline Terminals.
An identification of the persons who will be directly affected by, bear the costs of or directly benefit
from the rulemaking.
The persons who will be directly affected by and bear the costs of this rulemaking to revised Rule 351 will
be facilities in Maricopa County that engage in the storage of gasoline in a stationary storage tank at a bulk
gasoline plant or bulk gasoline terminal, and the loading of gasoline from a gasoline cargo tank, railroad
tank car or pipeline into or out of a stationary storage tank at a bulk gasoline plant or bulk gasoline
terminal. The department has issued permits to 27 facilities subject to Rule 351, prior to revision.
A cost benefit analysis of the following:
(a) The probable costs and benefits to the implementing agency and other agencies directly affected
by the implementation and enforcement of the rulemaking.
Because this rulemaking does not impose any new compliance burdens on permitted regulated entities
or introduce additional regulatory requirements, the department deemed that none of the revisions have
potentially significant economic impacts on permitted sources. It is expected that the department will
benefit from the increased clarity of the rule with decreased time to inspect a facility or prepare a
permit. In addition, the rulemaking will not impose increased monetary or regulatory costs on other
state agencies, political subdivisions of this state, persons, or individuals so regulated.
The benefits of the rule revision are anticipated to be a result of the following changes:
- Consolidating the gasoline requirements in Rule 351 while moving the organic liquid loading
requirements to Rule 350.
- Deleting some definitions and adding new definitions specific to the gasoline industry and in line
with terms defined in 40 CFR 63.11100, the Gasoline Distribution Bulk Terminal, Bulk Plants and
Pipeline Facilities NESHAP;
- Clarifying the regulatory requirements for storing and loading gasoline at bulk plants and bulk
terminals;
- Adding monthly equipment leak inspection requirement;

- Adding optical gas imaging as an alternative work practice to monitor and identify leaking
equipment;
- Clarifying vapor vent/vacuum valve requirement at bulk plants and bulk terminals pursuant to the
Maricopa Environmental Quality, Air Pollution Control Division, Technical Guidance TG-003,
May 19, 1993.
The permitted sources subject to revised Rule 351 already have permits in which these requirements
are addressed. Therefore, this revised rule does not impose new requirements on the permitted
facilities, and no costs would be incurred for compliance with the rule revisions.
(b) The probable costs and benefits to a political subdivision of this state directly affected by the
implementation and enforcement of the rulemaking
The rule revisions will not impose increased monetary or regulatory costs on other state agencies,
political subdivisions of this state, persons, or individuals so regulated.
(c) The probable costs and benefits to businesses directly affected by the rulemaking, including any
anticipated effect on the revenues or payroll expenditures of employers who are subject to the
rulemaking.
The department anticipates that increased clarity provided by the Rule 351 revisions will provide a
benefit to the regulated community; it will take less time for sources subject to the rule to understand
and comply with the rule, which leads to increased compliance, which leads to decreased costs of
compliance to the regulated community. The department does not anticipate these rule revisions to
have a significant impact on a person's income, revenue, or employment in this state related to this
activity. The rule revision will not impose increased monetary or regulatory costs on individuals so
regulated.
A general description of the probable impact on private and public employment in businesses,
agencies and political subdivisions of this state directly affected by the rulemaking.
The rule revisions will not impose increased monetary or regulatory costs on other state agencies, political
subdivisions of this state, persons, or individuals so regulated.
A statement of the probable impact of the rulemaking on small businesses.
The rule revisions will not impose increased monetary or regulatory costs on any permitted business,
persons, or individuals so regulated.
(a) An identification of the small businesses subject to the rulemaking.
Small businesses subject to this rulemaking are those facilities in Maricopa County that engage in the
storage of gasoline in a stationary storage tank at a bulk gasoline plant or bulk gasoline terminal, and
the loading of gasoline from a gasoline cargo tank, railroad tank car or pipeline into or out of a
stationary storage tank at a bulk gasoline plant or bulk gasoline terminal.
(b) The administrative and other costs required for compliance with the rulemaking.
This rulemaking updates and clarifies existing rule provisions and definitions to be consistent with
federal performance standards; and to reduce confusion and improve understanding and readability.
The department considered the implications of the amendments to the regulated entities and the
implementing agency and deemed that none of the rule revisions have potentially significant economic
impacts.
(c) A description of the methods that the agency may use to reduce the impact on small businesses.
(i) Establishing less costly compliance requirements in the rulemaking for small businesses.
By correcting and clarifying existing rule provisions and definitions, this rulemaking lessens or
eases the regulatory burden for small businesses.
(ii) Establishing less costly schedules or less stringent deadlines for compliance in the
rulemaking.

This rulemaking corrects or clarifies existing rule provisions and definitions to reduce confusion
and improve understanding and readability.
(iii) Exempting small businesses from any or all requirements of the rulemaking.
This rulemaking corrects or clarifies existing rule provisions and definitions to reduce confusion
and improve understanding and readability.
(d) The probable cost and benefit to private persons and consumers who are directly affected by the
rulemaking.
This rulemaking does not impose any new compliance burdens on regulated entities that are permitted
or introduce additional regulatory requirements and will not impose increased monetary or regulatory
costs on any permitted business, persons, or individuals so regulated. As such, there are no costs to
pass through to consumers, which means there are no impacts on consumers.
A statement of the probable effect on state revenues.
The rule revisions will not impose increased monetary or regulatory costs on other state agencies, political
subdivisions of this state, persons, or individuals so regulated. Without costs to pass through to customers,
there is no projected change in consumer purchase patterns and, thus, no impact on state revenues from
sales taxes.
A description of any less intrusive or less costly alternative methods of achieving the purpose of the
rulemaking.
This rulemaking corrects or clarifies existing rule provisions and definitions to reduce confusion and
improve understanding and readability.
11. Name and address of department personnel with whom persons may communicate regarding the
accuracy of the economic, small business, and consumer impact:
Name: Cheri Dale or Hether Krause
Maricopa County Air Quality Department
Planning and Analysis Division
Address: 1001 N Central Avenue, Suite 125
Phoenix, AZ 85004
Telephone: (602) 506-6010
Fax: (602) 506-6179
E-mail: aqplanning@mail.maricopa.gov
12. Description of the changes between the proposed rule, including supplemental notices and final rule:
Since the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking was published on May 13, 2016 (22 A.A.R 1224), the
department is proposing the following additional amendments:
 Deleted the term “transfer” and inserted the term “loading” in the following sections:
 Section 103.1
 Section 303.4(d)
 Section 303.4(e)
 Deleted the term “person” and inserted the term “owner or operator” in the following sections:
 Section 211
 Section 212
 Section 304.3(a)

 Section 304.3(b)
 Section 405
 Deleted proposed new text “under actual storage and loading conditions” from the end-of the sentence
in Section 101 (Purpose)
 Added the term “gasoline” to definition in Section 203
 Changed the term “Gasoline Dispensing Operation” to “Gasoline Dispensing Facility” in Section 211
 Deleted the term “organic liquid” and inserted the term “gasoline” in Section 218.3
 Deleted the term “pipe” in Section 302.1 section title
 Revised the title of Section 302.2 per Stakeholder comment
 Moved the second and third sentences in Section 303.1(c)(1) to new Sections 303.1(c)(3) and 303.1(b),
respectively
 Clarified, in Section 303.4(d) (Vapor Loss Control System-Bulk Gasoline Terminal), that vapor loss
control system must prevent at least 95% by weight of the VOCs escaping into the atmosphere and
must reduce emissions of VOC to not more than 0.08 pounds per 1000 gallons of gasoline transferred.
The “0.08 pound per 1000 gallons” standard is original text from Section 301.1 (General Requirements
For Loading Facilities-Bulk Terminals); standard is a California Air Resources Board (CARB)
standard for vapor recovery systems
 Added the term “stationary” to Section 304.1
 Deleted the wording “volatile organic compounds” and inserted “VOC” in Sections 304.3(a) and (b)
 Clarified, in Sections 304.3(a) and (b) (General Requirements For The Loading Of Gasoline-Loading
Of Gasoline At A Bulk Gasoline Plant), that if using a vapor loss control system, then such system
must reduce emissions of VOC to not more than 0.6 pounds per 1000 gallons of gasoline transferred.
The “0.6 pound per 1000 gallons” standard is original text from Sections 301.2(a) and (b) (General
Requirements For Loading Facilities-Bulk Plant Tanks Over 250 Gallons-Transfer To Bulk Plant
Tanks And Loading From Bulk Plant Tanks)
 Clarified, in Section 304.4 (General Requirements For The Loading Of Gasoline-Loading Of Gasoline
At A Bulk Gasoline Terminal), that vapor loss control system must prevent at least 95% by weight of
the VOCs escaping into the atmosphere and must reduce emissions of VOC to not more than 0.08
pounds per 1000 gallons of gasoline transferred. The “0.08 pound per 1000 gallons” standard is
original text from Section 301.1 (General Requirements For Loading Facilities-Bulk Terminals) );
standard is a California Air Resources Board (CARB) standard for vapor recovery systems
 Deleted the term “vapor collection/processing unit” and inserted “vapor loss control system” in Section
401.3
 Deleted the wording “or his representative” in Section 401.3
 Moved Section 403 to new Section 501.4 and changed the requirement that pressure be recorded at
least once every one (1) minute to every five (5) minutes while a gasoline cargo tank is being loaded
during performance testing and added the requirement that the highest instantaneous pressure that
occurs during each loading shall be recorded per Stakeholder comment
 Added the acronym “OVA” in Section 501.1
 Underlined the new language where it was not previously identified as new language in the following
sections:
 Section 214
 Section 500
 Section 501: Changed the title of the section from “Monitoring For Leaks” to “Determining Vapor
Tight Status”. Changing the title of the section from “Monitoring for Leaks” to “Determining Vapor

Tight Status” clarifies the intent of the section. The department believes the phrase “If a determination
of vapor tight status is to be made…” sets the parameters as to when a vapor tight status is to be
determined.
 Section 504 (Compliance Determination-Test Methods Incorporated By Reference): Included text that
allows for the use of alternative test methods to determine compliance with the rule and that allows test
methods as approved by the Administrator to be used and clarified the provision regarding when more
than one test method is permitted for a compliance determination. Return to list of attachments
13. Summary of the comments made regarding the rule and the department response to them:
Since the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking was published on May 13, 2016 (22 A.A.R. 1224), the
department received comments from Kinder Morgan/SFPP. The comments and the department’s responses
are provided below.
Comment #1: Section 403 (Administrative Requirements-Performance Testing)
What is the basis for the every minute pressure recording? Per 40 CFR Subpart XX, Section 60.503(d)(2),
during the performance test the pressure shall be recorded every 5 minutes while a gasoline truck is being
loaded and the highest instantaneous pressure that occurs during each loading shall also be recorded. SFPP
proposes to revise the section to delete “The pressure shall be recorded periodically during performance
testing at least once every minute” and to add “The pressure shall be recorded every 5 minutes while a
gasoline truck is being loaded; the highest instantaneous pressure that occurs during each loading shall be
recorded”. A pressure measurement device capable of measuring 20 inches (50.8 cm) of water pressure
with a precision of 0.1 (2.5 mm) inch of water shall be calibrated. This device shall fit the tap and shall
either be permanently installed or shall be kept available at all times at the facility.
Response #1: Section 403 (Administrative Requirements-Performance Testing)
The department proposes to move Section 403 (Performance Testing) to new Section 501.4 (Determining
Vapor Tight Status-Gasoline Cargo Tank Loading Pressure) and proposes to change the requirement for
recording pressure every one (1) minute while a gasoline cargo tank is being loaded during performance
testing to every five (5) minutes. The five (5) minute requirement is consistent with 40 CFR Subpart XX,
Section 60.503(d)(2). The department discussed the comment with Kinder Morgan/SFPP and the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and reviewed the federal requirements. Kinder Morgan/SFPP
stated that the back pressure is continuously monitored by the source test contractor while a gasoline truck
is being loaded during performance testing and that the instantaneous reading at the five (5)-minute mark
and the maximum instantaneous reading during the last five (5) minutes are recorded. The federal
requirements (40 CFR Subpart XX Section 60.503(d)(2)) state that during the performance test, the
pressure shall be recorded every five (5) minutes while a gasoline truck is being loaded and the highest
instantaneous pressure that occurs during each loading shall be recorded. After considering the comments,
reviewing the federal requirements, and reviewing the text as proposed in draft Rule 351, the department is
proposing to change the requirement for recording pressure every one (1) minute while a gasoline cargo
tank is being loaded during performance testing to every five (5) minutes to be consistent with the federal
requirement in 40 CFR Subpart XX, Section 60.503(d)(2). With this change, the department is proposing
that draft Rule 351 is no less stringent than the SIP-approved rule. Draft Rule 351 is being clarified to
match federal requirements.
14. Any other matters prescribed by the statute that are applicable to the specific department or to any
specific rule or class of rules:
Not applicable
15. Incorporations by reference and their location in the rule:
The following test methods are incorporated by reference in Rule 351, Section 504:
EPA Method 2A - Direct Measurement of Gas Volume through Pipes and Small Ducts
EPA Method 2B- Determination of Exhaust Gas Volume Flow Rate from Gasoline Vapor Incinerators
EPA Method 18 - Measurement of Gaseous Organic Compound Emissions by Gas Chromatography

EPA Method 21 - Determination of Volatile Organic Compound Leaks
EPA Method 25A - Determination of Total Gaseous Organic Concentration Using a Flame Ionization
Analyzer
EPA Method 25B - Determination of Total Gaseous Organic Concentration Using a Nondispersive Infrared
Analyzer
EPA Method 27 - Determination of Vapor Tightness of Gasoline Delivery Tank Using Pressure Vacuum
Test
California Air Resources Board (CARB) Test Procedures TP-201.1E Leak Rate and Cracking Pressure of
Pressure/Vacuum Vent Valves, October 8, 2003.
ASTM D323-15a “Standard Test Method for Vapor Pressure of Petroleum Products (Reid Method)
ASTM D2879-10 Standard Test Method for Vapor Pressure-Temperature Relationship and Initial
Decomposition Temperature of Liquids by Isoteniscope
ASTM D4953-15 “Standard Test Method for Vapor Pressure of Gasoline and Gasoline-Oxygenate Blends
(Dry Method)
ASTM D5191-15 “Standard Test Method for Vapor Pressure of Petroleum Products (Mini Method)”
ASTM D6420-99 (Reapproved 2004), Standard Test Method for Determination of Gaseous Organic
Compounds by Direct Interface Gas Chromatography-Mass Spectrometry
American Petroleum Institute: API STD 650 Welded Tanks for Oil Storage, Twelfth Edition, Includes
Errata 1 (2013), Errata 2 (2014), and Addendum 1 (2014)
16. Was this rule previously an emergency rule?
No
Return to list of attachments
17. Full text of the rule follows:
MARICOPA COUNTY
AIR POLLUTION CONTROL REGULATIONS
REGULATION III - CONTROL OF AIR CONTAMINANTS
RULE 351
STORAGE AND LOADING OF ORGANIC LIQUIDS GASOLINE AT BULK GASOLINE PLANTS AND
BULK GASOLINE TERMINALS
INDEX
SECTION 100 - GENERAL
101 PURPOSE
102 APPLICABILITY
103 EXEMPTIONS
SECTION 200 – DEFINITIONS
201 BULK PLANT
201 AVIATION GASOLINE (AVGAS)
202 BULK GASOLINE PLANT
202 203 BULK GASOLINE TANK
203 204 BULK GASOLINE TERMINAL
204 DELIVERY VESSEL

205 205 DISPENSING TANK
206 206 EXCESS ORGANIC LIQUID GASOLINE DRAINAGE
207 EXTERNAL FLOATING ROOF STATIONARY STORAGE TANK
207 FUGITIVE LIQUID LEAK
208 208 GAS TIGHT
209 209 GASOLINE
210 GASOLINE CARGO TANK
210 211 GASOLINE DISPENSING OPERATION
211 212 GASOLINE LOADING FACILITY
213 INTERNAL FLOATING ROOF STATIONARY STORAGE TANK WITH FIXED ROOF
COVERING
214 LEAK FREE
212 OFFSET FILL LINE
213 215 ORGANIC LIQUID
216 PURGING
214 217 STATIONARY STORAGE TANK
215 218 SUBMERGED FILL PIPE
216 219 SWITCH LOADING
210 TRUE VAPOR PRESSURE (TVP)
220 VAPOR BALANCE SYSTEM
218 VAPOR COLLECTION/PROCESSING SYSTEM
219 VAPOR LOSS CONTROL DEVICE
221 VAPOR LOSS CONTROL SYSTEM
220 222 VAPOR TIGHT
SECTION 300 - STANDARDS
301 GENERAL REQUIREMENTS FOR LOADING FACILITIES FEDERAL STANDARDS OF
PERFORMANCE FOR BULK GASOLINE PLANTS AND BULK GASOLINE TERMINALS
302 OPERATING REQUIREMENTS FOR VAPOR LOSS CONTROL DEVICES GASOLINE
STATIONARY STORAGE TANK STANDARDS
303 REPAIR AND RETESTING REQUIREMENT VAPOR LOSS CONTROL
304 EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE AND OPERATING PRACTICES GENERAL
REQUIREMENTS FOR THE LOADING OF GASOLINE
305 EXEMPTIONS OPERATING REQUIREMENTS FOR VAPOR LOSS CONTROL SYSTEM
SECTION 400 - ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS
401 EQUIPMENT LEAKS
402 COMPLIANCE SCHEDULE GASOLINE STORAGE TANK INSPECTIONS
403 GASOLINE STORAGE TANK INSPECTIONS-AVAILABILITY TO CONTROL OFFICER
404 OTHER AGENCIES’ REQUIREMENTS

SECTION 500 - MONITORING AND RECORDS
501 LEAK DETECTION TEST PROCEDURE DETERMINING VAPOR TIGHT STATUS
502 COMPLIANCE INSPECTIONS
503 RECORDS RETENTION
504 COMPLIANCE DETERMINATION - TEST METHODS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE
Revised 07/13/88
Revised 04/06/92
Revised 02/15/95
Revised 07/13/1988; Revised 04/06/1992; Revised 02/15/1995; and MM/DD/YYYY
MARICOPA COUNTY
AIR POLLUTION CONTROL REGULATIONS
REGULATION III - CONTROL OF AIR CONTAMINANTS
RULE 351
STORAGE AND LOADING OF ORGANIC LIQUIDS GASOLINE AT BULK GASOLINE PLANTS AND
BULK GASOLINE TERMINALS
SECTION 100 - GENERAL
101 PURPOSE: To limit emissions of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) from emitted during the storage and the
loading of organic liquids gasoline at bulk gasoline plants and bulk gasoline terminals.
102 APPLICABILITY: This rule is applicable to: the transfer of organic liquids having a true vapor pressure of
1.5 psia (77.5 mm Hg) or greater under actual loading conditions. It regulates transfers at bulk terminals and
bulk plants from stationary storage tanks to delivery vessels and from delivery vessels to stationary storage
tanks.
102.1 The storage of gasoline in a stationary storage tank at a bulk gasoline plant or bulk gasoline
terminal.
102.2 The loading of gasoline from a gasoline cargo tank, railroad tank car or pipeline into or out of a
stationary storage tank at a bulk gasoline plant or bulk gasoline terminal.
103 EXEMPTIONS:
103.1 Aviation Gasoline: The loading of aviation gasoline into stationary storage tanks at airports, and
the subsequent loading of aviation gasoline within the airport, is exempt from Section 304 of this
rule. The storage of aviation gasoline at airports is subject to this rule.
103.2 Seal Gap: The owner or operator is exempted from the requirements for secondary seals and the
secondary seal gap criteria when performing gap measurements or inspections of the primary seal.
103.3 Submerged Fill: A gasoline stationary storage tank is exempt from the requirement that a
submerged fill discharge pipe be fully submerged when:
a. The tank is being drained completely.
b. The tank is being initially filled or filled after being completely drained.
103.4 Floating Roof: As long as eiher of the following processes is accomplished continuously and as
rapidly as practicable, a floating roof is exempt from the requirement that its roof be floating
when:
a. The tank is being drained completely.
b. The tank is being filled.

103.5 Bulk Gasoline Plants with a Throughput of Less than 120,000 Gallons Per 30-Day Period: At a
bulk gasoline plant built before October 2, 1978, vapor loss control specified in Section 303 of this
rule is not required at the loading rack when all of the following conditions are met:
a. The bulk gasoline plant loads less than 120,000 gallons (454,800 l) of gasoline into gasoline cargo
tanks in any consecutive 30-day period. Any bulk gasoline plant that becomes subject to all of the
provisions of Section 303 of this rule by exceeding the throughput threshold of 120,000 gallons of
gasoline in any consecutive 30-day period will remain subject to these provisions even if its
throughput later falls below the threshold.
b. Keep current records of amount of gasoline loaded and keep them readily accessible to the
Control Officer upon request for at least five (5) years.
c. Load gasoline using submerged fill only.
d. The owner or operator of the bulk gasoline plant shall observe all parts of the gasoline loading
process and shall discontinue the gasoline loading if any leaks are observed.
e. Opening of Hatches, Vent Valves or Other Vapor Sealing Devices:
(1) A hatch, vent valve or other vapor sealing device may be opened for vacuum relief on a
gasoline cargo tank or rail car when the gasoline is in the process of being loaded from
the gasoline cargo tank or rail car into a stationary storage tank. The owner or operator
shall reclose the hatch, vent valve or other vapor sealing device at the completion of the
loading process.
(2) When VOC vapors from gasoline are present within a gasoline cargo tank, authorized
government agents, as well as the owner or operator and their contractors may open
vapor containment equipment while performing operations required by this rule or by
other statutory entities, but shall be restricted as follows, unless approved in advance by
the Control Officer:
(a) Wait at least 3 minutes after the loading of gasoline is complete or gasoline cargo
tank has come to a complete stop before opening hatch or other vapor seal.
(b) Reclose hatch or other vapor sealing device within 3 minutes of opening.
(c) Limit wind speed at opened hatch or other opened sealing device to not more than 3
mph (1.34 m/sec).
SECTION 200 - DEFINITIONS: For the purpose of this rule, the following definitions shall apply:, in addition to
those definitions found in Rule 100 (General Provisions and Definitions) of these rules. In the event of any
inconsistency between any of the Maricopa County air pollution control rules, the definitions in this rule take
precedence.
201 BULK PLANT - Any loading facility at which gasoline and/or other organic liquids with a true vapor
pressure of 1.5 psia (77.5 mm Hg) or greater under any actual storage conditions are received from delivery
vessels for storage in on-site stationary tanks, and from which such liquids also are transferred to delivery
vessels.
201 AVIATION GASOLINE (AVgas): A type of gasoline used to fuel a piston engine aircraft.
202 BULK GASOLINE PLANT: Any gasoline storage and distribution facility that meets all of the
following:
201.1 Loads gasoline from a pipeline, rail, or gasoline cargo tank into a stationary storage tank;
201.2 Loads gasoline from the stationary storage tank into a gasoline cargo tank for transport to a
gasoline dispensing facility or a bulk gasoline plant; and
201.3 Has a gasoline throughput of less than 20,000 gallons per day. Gasoline throughput shall be the
maximum calculated design throughput as may be limited by compliance with an enforceable
condition under Federal, State, or local law, and discoverable by the Control Officer.

202 203 BULK GASOLINE TANK: Any stationary storage tank serving a loading rack which loads delivery
vessels gasoline cargo tanks with organic liquids gasoline.
203 204 BULK GASOLINE TERMINAL: Any primary distributing gasoline storage and gasoline loading
facility that meets all of the following: which has ever received in any consecutive 30-day period over 600,000
gallons (2,271,180 l) of gasoline and/or other organic liquids with a true vapor pressure of 1.5 psia (77.5 mm
Hg) or greater under actual storage conditions; or any loading facility where delivery of such liquids to the
facility is primarily by pipeline.
204.1 Loads gasoline from a pipeline, rail, or gasoline cargo tank into a stationary storage tank;
204.2 Loads gasoline from the stationary storage tank into a gasoline cargo tank for transport to a
gasoline dispensing facility or a bulk gasoline plant; and
204.3 Has a gasoline throughput of 20,000 gallons per day or greater. Gasoline throughput shall be the
maximum calculated design throughput as may be limited by compliance with an enforceable
condition under Federal, State, or local law, and discoverable by the Administrator and any other
person.
204 DELIVERY VESSEL - Any vehicular-mounted container such as a railroad tank car, tanker truck, tank trailer
or any other mobile container used to transport organic liquids.
205 205 DISPENSING TANK: Any stationary tank which dispenses organic liquid fuel gasoline directly into the fuel
tanks of motor vehicles including aircraft. a motorized vehicle’s fuel tank, dispenses gasoline into an
aircraft’s fuel tank, or dispenses gasoline into a watercraft’s fuel tank that directly fuels its engine(s). This
includes aircraft.
206 206 EXCESS ORGANIC LIQUID GASOLINE DRAINAGE: More than 10 milliliters (0.34 fluid ounces or 2
teaspoonsful) per disconnect. of liquid gasoline lost from the end of a fill hose or vapor recovery hose in the
process of connecting or disconnecting the hose; or any quantity of gasoline escaping out the end of such a
hose that wets any area(s) on the ground having an aggregate area greater than 113 square inches, or the
perimeter of which would encompass a circle of 12 inches (30.5 cm) diameter. This does not include
drainage into a fill pipe’s spill containment receptacle.
207 EXTERNAL FLOATING ROOF STATIONARY STORAGE TANK: An open top stationary storage
tank with a floating roof consisting of a double deck or pontoon single deck that rests upon and is supported
by the liquid being contained.
207 FUGITIVE LIQUID LEAK: An organic liquid leak of more than three drops per minute from any single leak
source other than the disconnect operation of liquid fill line and vapor line.
208 GAS TIGHT: Having no leak of gaseous organic compound(s) exceeding 10,000 ppm above background
when measurements are made using EPA Method 21 with a methane calibration standard.
209 GASOLINE: Any petroleum distillate, petroleum distillate/alcohol blend, petroleum distillate/organic
compound blend, or alcohol having a true vapor pressure of 1.5 psia (77.5 mm Hg) or greater under any actual
conditions of storage and handling, and which is that meets both of the following conditions:
209.1 Has a Reid vapor pressure between 4.0 and 14.7 psi (200–760 mm Hg.), as determined by ASTM
D323-15a; and
209.2 Is and which is used as a fuel for internal combustion engines.
210 GASOLINE CARGO TANK: A delivery tank truck or railcar which is loading gasoline or which has
loaded gasoline on the immediately previous load.
210 211 GASOLINE DISPENSING OPERATION FACILITY: All gasoline dispensing tanks and associated
equipment located on one or more contiguous or adjacent properties under the control of the same person or
persons owner or operator under common control.
211 212 GASOLINE LOADING FACILITY: Any gasoline operation or facility such as a gasoline storage tank
farm, pipeline terminal, bulk gasoline plant, bulk gasoline terminal loading dock or combination thereof,
where organic liquids are transferred or gasoline is loaded into or out of delivery vessels gasoline cargo
tanks for future distribution. Included are all related pollutant-emitting activities which are located on one

or more contiguous or adjacent properties, and are under the control of the same person or persons owner or
operator under common control.
213 INTERNAL FLOATING ROOF STATIONARY STORAGE TANK WITH FIXED ROOF
COVERING: A stationary storage tank with a floating cover or roof that rests upon or is floated upon the
liquid being contained, and that also has a fixed roof on top of the tank shell. An external floating roof tank
that has been retrofitted with a geodesic dome or other fixed roof shall be considered to be an internal
floating roof tank for the purposes of this rule.
214 LEAK FREE: A condition in which there is no liquid gasoline escape or seepage of more than 3 drops per
minute from gasoline storage, handling, and ancillary equipment, including, but not limited to, seepage and
escapes from above ground fittings.
212 OFFSET FILL LINE: Any organic-liquid fill line (piping and fittings) which contains one or more bends.
213 215 ORGANIC LIQUID: Any organic compound which exists as a liquid under any actual conditions of use,
transport or storage.
216 PURGING: Removing, cleaning, or scouring out gasoline vapors from all or a portion of a gasoline cargo
tank by active or passive means and emitting the vapors into the atmosphere.
214 217 STATIONARY STORAGE TANK: Any tank, reservoir or other container used to store, but not
transport, organic liquids gasoline.
215 218 SUBMERGED FILL PIPE: Any discharge pipe or nozzle which meets the applicable specification as
follows: Any gasoline discharge pipe or nozzle which meets at least one of the applicable specifications:
215.1 218.1 Top-Filled Fill or Bottom-Filled Fill Tanks: The end of the discharge pipe or nozzle is totally
submerged when the liquid level is six inches (15 cm) from the bottom of the tank, unless exempted
by Section 103.3 of this rule.
215.2 218.2 Side-Filled Fill: The end of the discharge pipe or nozzle is totally submerged when the liquid level is
18 inches (46 cm) from the bottom of the tank, unless exempted by Section 103.3 of this rule.
Submerged Fill Diagram
NOT TO SCALE
Top Fill Opening
6” Maximum
Height from bottom
of the tank
Side Fill
Maximum 18” from
bottom of the tank
Bottom Fill
Minimum 6”
of liquid
216 219 SWITCH LOADING: Loading diesel fuel into a delivery vessel gasoline cargo tank whose previous load was
gasoline; or loading any organic liquid not subject to this rule into a delivery vessel gasoline cargo tank whose
previous load was an organic liquid gasoline and subject to this rule.
210 TRUE VAPOR PRESSURE (TVP): Absolute vapor pressure of a liquid at its existing temperature of
storage and handling.

220 VAPOR BALANCE SYSTEM: A piping system that is designed to collect gasoline vapors displaced from
the loading of gasoline, and to route the collected vapors to the gasoline cargo tank from which the gasoline
is being loaded.
218 VAPOR COLLECTION/PROCESSING SYSTEM: A vapor loss control device consisting of a vapor
gathering subsystem capable of collecting the organic vapors and organic gases plus a second subsystem
capable of processing such vapors and gases, preventing at least 95 percent of the volatile organic compounds
entering it from entering the atmosphere.
219 VAPOR LOSS CONTROL DEVICE: Any piping, hoses, equipment, and devices which are used to collect,
store and/or process organic vapors at a bulk terminal, bulk plant, service station or other operation handling
gasoline and/or other organic liquids.
221 VAPOR LOSS CONTROL SYSTEM: A system for reducing emissions to the atmosphere, consisting of
an abatement device and a collection system, which achieves the abatement efficiency or emission limit
during the loading of gasoline.
220 222 VAPOR TIGHT: A condition where no organic vapor leak reaches or exceeds 100 percent of the lower
explosive limit at a distance of one inch (2.5 cm) from a leak when measured with a combustible gas detector or
an organic vapor analyzer, both calibrated with propane. in which a suitable detector at the site of (potential)
leakage of vapor shows less than 10,000 ppmv when calibrated with methane or the detector shows less than
1/5 lower explosive limit (LEL) when calibrated with a gas specified by the manufacturer and used according to
the manufacturer’s instructions.
SECTION 300 – STANDARDS
301 GENERAL REQUIREMENTS FOR LOADING FACILITIES: All bulk terminals and plants must have
submerged fill pipes in all tanks over 250 gallons (946 l) storing organic liquids, observe designated
procedures and be equipped with applicable equipment as follows:
301.1 Bulk Terminals: No person shall load organic liquids having a TVP of 1.5 psia (77.5 mm Hg) or
greater into any delivery vessel from a stationary storage tank at a bulk terminal unless the vessel
bears a current pressure-test decal issued by the Control Officer and the terminal uses a vapor
collection/processing system which reduces the emissions of volatile organic compounds to not
more than .08 pounds per 1000 gallons of such liquids transferred (10 grams per 1000 liters).
Switch loading shall be subject to this standard. The terminal owner or operator and the operator
of the receiving vessel shall act to ensure that the vapor line is connected before such liquids are
transferred.
301.2 Bulk Plant Tanks Over 250 Gallons (>946 L):
a. Transfer To Bulk Plant Tanks: No person shall transfer gasoline from a delivery vessel into a
bulk plant tank exceeding 250 gallons (946 l) capacity unless the delivery vessel bears a current
county pressure-test decal and uses a vapor balance system equipped with fittings which are vapor
tight; or, alternatively, a vapor loss control system is used which emits to atmosphere less than 0.6
pound of volatile organic compounds per 1000 gallons transferred (72 grams per 1000 liters).
b. Loading From Bulk Plant Tanks: No person shall transfer gasoline from a bulk plant tank
exceeding 250 gallons (946 l) into a delivery vessel unless both the loading rack and delivery
vessel use a vapor balance system equipped with fittings which are vapor tight; or, alternatively, a
vapor loss control system is used which emits to atmosphere less than 0.6 pounds of volatile
organic compounds per 1000 gallons loaded (72 grams per 1000 liters).
302 OPERATING REQUIREMENTS FOR VAPOR LOSS CONTROL DEVICES: The owner or operator of a
vapor loss control device subject to this rule shall operate the device and organic liquid transfer equipment
as follows:
302.1 Loading shall be accomplished in a manner that prevents gauge pressure from exceeding 18 inches
of water (33.6 mm Hg) and vacuum from exceeding six inches of water (11.2 mm Hg) in the tank
truck. Each owner or operator of a facility shall act to ensure that any vapor recovery system
required by this Rule 351 is connected between the delivery vessel and the storage tank during all
organic liquid transfers.

302.2 Loading shall be accomplished in a manner that prevents overfills, fugitive liquid leaks or excess
organic liquid drainage. Owners or operators of bulk plants or operators of delivery vessels shall
observe all parts of the transfer and shall discontinue transfer if any leaks are observed. Measures
shall be taken to prevent liquid leaks from the loading device when it is not in use, and to
complete drainage before the loading device is disconnected. During loading or unloading
operations, potential leak sources shall be vapor tight as demonstrated by the test procedure
described in Section 501 of this rule.
302.3 Loading operations which use vapor collection/processing equipment shall be accomplished in
such a manner that the displaced vapor and air will be vented only to the vapor
collection/processing system, which shall be operated gas-tight and in a manner such that the
vapor processing capacity is not exceeded. Diaphragms used in vapor storage tanks shall be
maintained gas-tight.
302.4 Vapor transfer lines shall be equipped with fittings that are vapor tight and that automatically and
immediately close upon disconnection. Vapor balance systems shall be designed to prevent any
vapors collected at one loading rack from passing to another loading rack.
303 REPAIR AND RETESTING REQUIREMENT: Except as superseded by Division actions pursuant to the
procedures of Rule 100, Section 501 ("Malfunctions"), the owner/operator of a vapor loss control device
that exceeds the standards of this rule shall notify the Control Officer and observe the following time
schedule in ending such exceedances:
303.1 Concentrations at or above the lower explosive limit must be brought into compliance within 24
hours of detection.
303.2 Leak concentrations exceeding 10,000 ppm but less than 50,000 ppm as methane for vapor
collection/processing equipment subject to gas-tight standard shall be brought into compliance
within 5 days of detection.
303.3 Except as the Control Officer otherwise specifies, a leak source subject to Sections 303.1 or 303.2
must be tested after presumed leak-correction within 15 minutes of recommencing use; if leak
standards are exceeded in this test, the use of the faulty equipment shall be discontinued within 15
minutes until correction is verified by retesting.
304 EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE AND OPERATING PRACTICES: All equipment associated with
delivery and loading operations shall be maintained to be leak free, vapor tight and in good working order.
Gasoline shall not be spilled, discarded in sewers, stored in open containers, or handled in any other
manner that would result in evaporation to the atmosphere. Purging of gasoline vapors and of JP-4 (jet
petrol) vapors is prohibited.
305 EXEMPTIONS:
305.1 Less Than 120,000 Gallons Per 30-Day Period: At bulk plants built before October 2, 1978, vapor
loss control specified in Section 301.2b is not required at the outloading rack when all of the
following are complied with:
a.After April 6, 1992, the bulk plant loads less than 120,000 gallons (454,800l) of gasoline into
delivery vessels in any consecutive 30-day period. Any plant that becomes subject to all of the
provisions of Section 301.2b by exceeding this threshold will remain subject to these provisions
even if its output later falls below the threshold.
b. Keep current records of amount of gasoline loaded and keep them readily accessible to the Division
upon request for at least three (3) years.
c. Load outgoing gasoline using submerged fill only.
d. The owners or operators of the bulk plant or the owners or operators of the delivery vessel shall
observe all parts of the transfer and shall discontinue the transfer if any leaks are observed.
305.2 Opening Hatches: When VOC vapors from organic liquids are present within a non-exempt
delivery vessel, authorized government agents as well as owners/operators and their contractors
may open vapor containment equipment while performing operations required by Division rules or

by other statutory entities, but shall be restricted as follows unless approved in advance by the
Control Officer:
a. Wait at least 3 minutes after onloading is complete or delivery vessel has stopped before
opening hatch or other vapor seal.
b. Reclose hatch or other sealing device within 3 minutes of opening.
c. Limit windspeed at opened hatch or other opened sealing device to not more than 3 mph (1.34
m/sec).
301 FEDERAL STANDARDS OF PERFORMANCE FOR BULK GASOLINE PLANTS AND BULK
GASOLINE TERMINALS: An owner or operator of a bulk gasoline plant or bulk gasoline terminal must
meet the applicable federal standards of performance set forth in new source performance standards
(NSPS) set forth in 40 CFR Part 60, Subparts K-Standards of Performance for Storage Vessels for
Petroleum Liquids for Which Construction, Reconstruction, or Modification Commenced after June 11,
1973, and Prior to May 19, 1978; Ka-Standards of Performance for Storage Vessels for Petroleum Liquids
for Which Construction, Reconstruction, or Modification Commenced After May 18, 1978, and Prior to
July 23, 1984; Kb- Standards of Performance for Volatile Organic Liquid Storage Vessels (Including
Petroleum Liquid Storage Vessels) for Which Construction, Reconstruction, or Modification Commenced
after July 23, 1984; Subpart XX-Standard of Performance for Bulk Gasoline Terminals; and the national
emission standards for hazardous air pollutants (NESHAP) set forth in 40 CFR Part 63, Subpart BBBBBB-
NESHAP Gasoline Distribution Bulk Terminals, Bulk Plants and Pipeline Facilities, and all accompanying
appendices, excluding the authorities that cannot be delegated to the department. These federal standards
are adopted and incorporated by reference in Rule 360 and Rule 370 in these rules.
302 GASOLINE STATIONARY STORAGE TANK STANDARDS:
302.1 Submerged Fill: The owner or operator of a gasoline stationary storage tank with a capacity more
than 250 gallons (946 l) shall only allow the loading of gasoline into a stationary storage tank or a
gasoline cargo tank using submerged fill.
302.2 Gasoline Stationary Storage Tanks with a Capacity Between 250 Gallons (946 l) and 40,000
Gallons (151,400 L): For gasoline stationary storage tanks with a capacity more than 250 gallons
(946 l) but less than 40,000 gallons (151,400 l), an owner or operator shall store gasoline in a
stationary storage tank that meets all of the following requirements:
a. Each tank has a fill pipe that is maintained leak free and vapor tight.
b. Each tank has a permanently installed submerged fill pipe. Where, because of government
regulation including, but not limited to, Fire Department codes, such a fill pipe cannot be
installed, a nozzle extension that reaches within 6 inches of the tank bottom shall be used to
fill the tank.
c. Each fixed roof tank has a pressure/vacuum valve that is maintained in good working order
and that is installed with a pressure/vacuum vent valve that is either set within ten percent of
the tank’s maximum, safe working-pressure or is set at least at 0.5 psia (25.8 mm Hg).
d. The tank is equipped with a vapor balance system which collects and returns displaced vapors
to the gasoline cargo tank using vapor tight fittings and lines; or such tank uses at least one of
the vapor loss control methods in Sections 303 of this rule.
302.3 Gasoline Storage Tanks with a Capacity Equal to or Greater than 40,000 Gallons (151,400
L): An owner or operator of a gasoline stationary storage tank with a capacity equal to or greater
than 40,000 gallons (151,400 l), shall store gasoline in a stationary storage tank that is equipped
with at least one of the following:
a. An external floating roof storage tank; or
b. An internal floating roof storage tank with a fixed cover; or
c. A vapor loss control system.
303 VAPOR LOSS CONTROL:

303.1 External Floating Roof Stationary Storage Tanks: An external floating roof stationary storage
tank must meet the following requirements:
a. The owner or operator of an external floating roof stationary storage tank and a vapor balance
system or vapor loss control system shall properly install, properly maintain and properly
operate the equipment.
b. An owner or operator shall operate an external floating roof stationary storage tank subject to
the provisions of this rule, except for tanks having metallic shoe primary seals onto which
secondary seals were installed prior to July 13, 1988 and unless a secondary seal extends from
the roof to the tank shell (a rim-mounted seal) and is not attached to the primary seal.
c. Floating Roof Requirements:
(1) The floating roof shall rest on and be supported by the surface of the liquid contents.
(2) The floating roof shall be equipped with a continuous primary seal to close the space
between the roof eave and tank wall, except as provided in Section 103.4 of this rule.
(3) The floating roof shall have a continuous secondary seal which is of a design that is in
accordance with accepted standards of the petroleum industry. The secondary seal shall
meet the requirements of Section 303.1(d) of this rule.
d. Secondary Seal Requirements:
(1) The secondary seal is to be installed above the primary seal so that it completely covers
the space between the roof edge or primary seal and the tank wall, except as provided in
Section 303.1(d)(2) of this rule.
(2) The accumulated area of gaps between the tank wall and the secondary seal shall not
exceed 1.0 square inch per foot (21.2 cm2 per meter) of tank diameter. Determinations of
gap area shall only be made at the point(s) where the gaps exceed 1/8 inch (3 mm). The
width of any portion of any gap shall not exceed 1/2 inch (1.27 cm).
(3) Stationary storage tanks constructed after July 13, 1988, shall have a secondary seal that
is rim-mounted.
e. Floating Roof Openings:
(1) Floating roof tanks subject to the provisions of Section 303.1 of this rule shall have no
visible holes, tears or other openings in the seal or in any seal fabric.
(2) The accumulated area of gaps between a tank's wall and primary seal shall not exceed 10
square inches per foot of tank diameter (21.2 cm2 per meter)
(3) The width of any portion of any gap shall not exceed 1½ inches (3.8 cm).
(4) Where applicable, all openings except drains shall be equipped with a cover seal or lid.
(5) Where applicable, the cover seal or lid shall be in a closed position at all times, except
when the system is in actual use.
(6) Automatic bleeder vents shall be closed at all times, except when the roof is floated off or
landed on the roof leg supports.
(7) Rim vents, if provided, shall be set to open only when the roof is being floated off the
roof leg supports or at the manufacturer's recommended setting.
303.2 Internal Floating Roof Stationary Storage Tank with Fixed Roof Covering: An internal
floating roof stationary storage tank with fixed coverings and its appurtenances must meet the
following requirements:
a. The owner or operator of an internal floating roof stationary storage tank and a vapor balance
system or vapor loss control system shall properly install, properly maintain and properly
operate the equipment.

b. Gasoline stationary storage tanks for which construction, reconstruction or modification
commenced after July 23, 1984, must comply with all applicable requirements of the EPA
New Source Performance Standard (NSPS), 40 CFR Part 60, Subpart Kb- Standards of
Performance for Volatile Organic Liquid Storage Vessels (Including Petroleum Liquid
Storage Vessels) for Which Construction, Reconstruction, or Modification Commenced after
July 23, 1984, as incorporated by reference July 1, 2016.
c. All tanks not subject to Section 303.2(b) must comply with one of the following:
(1) Comply with 40 CFR Part 60, Subpart Kb, notwithstanding the type of facility and the
date of tank construction, reconstruction or modification; or
(2) Have at least one continuous seal which completely covers the space between the roof
edge and tank wall, except as provided in Section 303.2(d) of this rule, and meet at least
one of the following requirements:
(a) Have a contact-type roof resting completely on the liquid surface.
(b) Have a liquid mounted seal.
(c) Have two seals, a primary and a secondary.
d. Floating Roof Openings:
(1) Floating roof tanks subject to the provisions of Section 303.2 of this rule shall have no
visible holes, tears or other openings in the seal or in any seal fabric.
(2) The accumulated area of gaps between a tank's wall and primary seal shall not exceed 10
square inches per foot of tank diameter (21.2 cm2 per meter)
(3) The width of any portion of any gap shall not exceed 1½ inches (3.8 cm).
(4) Where applicable, all openings except drains shall be equipped with a cover seal or lid.
(5) Where applicable, the cover seal or lid shall be in a closed position at all times, except
when the system is in actual use.
(6) Automatic bleeder vents shall be closed at all times, except when the roof is floated off or
landed on the roof leg supports.
(7) Rim vents, if provided, shall be set to open only when the roof is being floated off the
roof leg supports or at the manufacturer's recommended setting.
303.3 Vapor Balance System: An owner or operator of a bulk gasoline plant shall properly install,
properly operate, and properly maintain a vapor balance system or, alternatively, use a vapor loss
control system.
303.4 Vapor Loss Control System: An owner or operator of a bulk gasoline terminal shall properly
install, properly operate, and properly maintain a vapor loss control system.
a. The vapor processing subsystem shall be vapor tight except for the designated exhaust.
b. Any gasoline cargo tank or stationary storage tank gauging or sampling device on a gasoline
cargo tank or stationary storage tank, vented to such a vapor loss control system, shall be
equipped with a vapor tight cover, which shall be closed at all times except during gauging or
sampling procedures.
c. All pressure-vacuum vent valves shall be constructed and maintained in a vapor tight
condition except when the operating pressure exceeds the valve release setting.
d. Switch loading shall be subject to vapor loss control system that is capable of preventing at
least 95% by weight of the VOCs escaping into the atmosphere and reduces emissions of
VOC to not more than 0.08 pounds per 1000 gallons of gasoline transferred.
e. The terminal owner or operator and the operator of the receiving vessel shall act to ensure that
the vapor recovery hose is connected before gasoline is loaded.

303.5 Equipment Maintenance, Operation and Repair: The owner or operator of a bulk gasoline
plant or bulk gasoline terminal shall:
a. Maintain the equipment associated with the storage and loading of gasoline as follows:
(1) Leak free;
(2) Vapor tight; and
(3) In good working order.
b. Repair and Retest: The owner or operator of a vapor balance system or vapor loss control
system that exceeds the standards of this rule shall notify the Control Officer immediately and
observe the following time schedule for corrective action:
(1) Concentrations at or above the lower explosive limit must be brought into compliance
within 24 hours of detection.
(2) For vapor collection/processing equipment subject to gas-tight standard, vapor leak
concentrations exceeding 10,000 ppmv but less than 50,000 ppmv as methane shall be
brought into compliance within five (5) days of detection.
(3) Except as the Control Officer otherwise specifies, a leak source must be tested after
presumed leak-correction within fifteen (15) minutes of recommencing use. If leak
standards are exceeded in this test, the use of the leak-correction equipment shall be
discontinued until correction is verified by retesting.
304 GENERAL REQUIREMENTS FOR THE LOADING OF GASOLINE: The owner or operator of a
bulk gasoline plant or a bulk gasoline terminal shall comply with the following:
304.1 Loading of Gasoline into Stationary Storage Tanks:
a. Comply with Section 302.1 of this rule.
b. Verify the proper connection to a vapor balance system or a vapor loss control system prior to
loading gasoline at facilities.
c. Verify the proper disconnection from a vapor balance system or a vapor loss control system at
the completion of loading gasoline at facilities.
d. Minimize spills during storage and loading of gasoline.
e. Clean up spills as expeditiously as practicable.
f. Cover all open containers of gasoline or gasoline soaked material when not in use.
g. Minimize gasoline sent to open waste collection systems that collect and transport gasoline to
reclamation and recycling devices, such as oil/water separators.
304.2 Loading of Gasoline into Gasoline Cargo Tanks:
a. Verify that the gasoline cargo tank displays a valid Maricopa County Vapor Tightness
Certification decal or a signed affidavit indicating an exemption from vapor tightness testing.
b. Verify the proper connection to a vapor balance system or a vapor loss control system prior to
the loading of gasoline.
c. Verify the proper disconnection from a vapor balance system or a vapor loss control system at
the completion of loading gasoline.
d. Minimize spills during storage and loading of gasoline.
e. Clean up spills as expeditiously as practicable.
f. Cover all open containers of gasoline and gasoline soaked material when not in use.
g. Minimize gasoline sent to open waste collection systems that collect and transport gasoline to
reclamation and recycling devices, such as oil/water separators.

h. Purging of gasoline vapors is prohibited.
304.3 Loading of Gasoline at a Bulk Gasoline Plant:
a. Loading of Gasoline into Gasoline Cargo Tanks: An owner or operator shall not load gasoline
from a gasoline cargo tank into a stationary storage tank at a bulk gasoline plant if the stationary
storage tank has a capacity of more than 250 gallons (946 l), unless the gasoline cargo tank
displays a valid Maricopa County Vapor Tightness Certification decal and uses a vapor balance
system equipped with fittings which are vapor tight or, alternatively, uses a vapor loss control
system that reduces emissions of VOC to not more than 0.6 pounds per 1000 gallons of
gasoline transferred.
b. Loading from Stationary Storage Tanks at Bulk Gasoline Plants: An owner or operator shall
not load gasoline from a stationary storage tank at a bulk gasoline plant if the stationary storage
tank has a capacity of more than 250 gallons (946 l) into a gasoline cargo tank unless both the
loading rack and gasoline cargo tank use a vapor balance system equipped with fittings which are
vapor tight or, alternatively, use a vapor loss control system that reduces emissions of VOC to
not more than 0.6 pounds per 1000 gallons of gasoline transferred.
304.4 Loading of Gasoline at a Bulk Gasoline Terminal: An owner or operator of a bulk gasoline
terminal shall load gasoline from a stationary storage tank, if the owner or operator meets all the
conditions of Sections 303.4 and 304.2 of this rule and uses a vapor loss control system that is
capable of preventing at least 95% by weight of the VOCs escaping into the atmosphere and
reduces emissions of VOC to not more than 0.08 pounds per 1000 gallons of gasoline
transferred.
305 OPERATING REQUIREMENTS FOR A VAPOR LOSS CONTROL SYSTEM: The owner or operator
of a vapor loss control system subject to this rule shall operate the system and gasoline loading equipment as
follows:
305.1 Loading shall be accomplished in a manner that prevents gauge pressure from exceeding 18 inches of
water (33.6 mm Hg) and vacuum from exceeding six inches of water (11.2 mm Hg) in the gasoline
cargo tank. Each owner or operator shall ensure that a vapor loss control system is connected between
the gasoline cargo tank and the gasoline storage tank during the loading of gasoline.
305.2 Loading shall be accomplished in a manner that prevents leaks, overfills, and excess gasoline
drainage. An owner or operator of a bulk gasoline plant or bulk gasoline terminal and the operator of
a gasoline cargo tank shall observe all parts of the loading and shall discontinue loading if any leaks
are observed. All appropriate measures shall be taken to prevent liquid leaks from the loading device
when it is not in use, and to complete drainage before the loading device is disconnected. During the
loading of gasoline, potential leak sources shall be vapor tight as demonstrated by the test procedure
described in Section 501 of this rule.
305.3 During the loading of gasoline, an owner or operator shall operate the vapor loss control system in
such a manner that the displaced vapor and air will be vented only to the vapor loss control system,
which shall be operated gas-tight and in a manner such that the vapor processing capacity is not
exceeded. Diaphragms used in vapor storage tanks shall be maintained gas-tight.
305.4 Vapor recovery hoses shall be equipped with fittings that are vapor tight and that automatically and
immediately close upon disconnection. Vapor balance systems shall be designed to prevent any
vapors collected at one loading rack from passing to another loading rack.
SECTION 400 - ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS
401 EQUIPMENT LEAKS:
401.1 The owner or operator shall perform monthly inspections, while vapor gasoline is being transferred,
for liquid and vapor leaks and for faulty equipment. In these monthly inspections, detection methods
incorporating sight, sound, smell and/or touch may be used. Monthly inspection leak detection
methods can include one or more of the following methods:
a. Incorporation of sight, sound, smell and/or touch.

b. Use of a combustible gas detector (CGD) or organic vapor analyzer (OVA) pursuant to
Section 501 of this rule.
c. Method 21-Determination of Volatile Organic Compound Leaks, Alternative Screening
Procedure 8.3.3, use of a soap solution pursuant to Section 501 of this rule.
d. Use of an optical gas imaging instrument calibrated according to manufacturing
specifications and used according to Section 501 of this rule.
401.2 A log book shall be used and signed by the owner or operator at the completion of each monthly
inspection for equipment leaks. A section of the log book shall contain a list, summary description, or
diagram(s) showing the location of all equipment in gasoline service at the facility.
401.3 Leak detection tests shall be conducted annually by the owner or operator of each bulk loading
facility or by a consultant, at the expense of the owner. gasoline plant or bulk gasoline terminal.
Testing shall be done according to procedures in Section 501 504 of this rule, except that EPA Method
21 shall be used to test for leaks from a vapor collection/ processing unit vapor loss control system and
its associated piping outside the loading area. Equipment shall conform to the specifications of those
test methods cited in Section 504.2 504 of this rule. Prior to testing, the owner or operator shall notify
the Control Officer of the date, time and location of the testing. The Control Officer or his
representatives shall at their discretion observe the tests.
402 COMPLIANCE SCHEDULE: By September 30, 1995, the owner or operator of any loading facility which
requires modification subject to a requirement of Section 300 of this rule shall submit to the Control Officer for
approval an emission control plan and a schedule for achieving compliance with all requirements by April 30,
1996. The plan shall specify the date of completion of each major step leading to compliance.
402 GASOLINE STORAGE TANK INSPECTIONS:
402.1 Inspection of an External Floating Roof Stationary Storage Tank:
a. The owner or operator of any external floating roof stationary storage tank subject to this rule
shall visually inspect the tank and seals at least once every six (6) months to determine
ongoing compliance with the applicable standards of this rule pertaining to the tank.
Determinations of secondary seal gap area on external floating roof stationary storage tanks
shall be made only once per year. Records of these inspections shall be maintained and shall
be made available to the Control Officer upon request.
b. Annual And Empty Tank Inspection: The owner or operator of any stationary storage tank
which uses an external floating roof to meet the vapor loss control system requirements of this
rule shall conduct a visual inspection each time the external floating roof stationary storage
tank is emptied and degassed or at least once a year. The visual inspection shall include all of
the following:
(1) Verify the secondary seal covers the space between the roof edge and the tank.
(2) Measure the gaps between the tank wall and the secondary seal. The accumulated area of
gaps between the tank wall and the secondary seal shall not exceed 21.2 cm2 (3.29
square inches) per meter of tank diameter and the width of any portion of any gap shall
not exceed 1.27 cm (0.2 inch).
(3) Verify there are no holes, tears, or other openings in the seal or seal fabric.
c. Five-Year, Full Circumference Inspections of External Floating Roof Stationary Storage
Tanks: The owner or operator of a floating roof tank of 20,000 gallons (75,700 l) or more
storing gasoline shall conduct a complete inspection of the external floating roof tank each
time the tank is emptied and degassed or at least once every five (5) years. This inspection can
be performed while the tank is in service. The inspection shall include all of the following:
(1) Perform a complete inspection of the gasoline storage tank as described in Section
402.1(a) of this rule.
(2) Perform a complete inspection of the primary seal and floating roof.

(3) Measure gap areas and maximum gap. The accumulated area of gaps between the tank
wall and the mechanical shoe or liquid-mounted primary seal shall not exceed 21.2 cm2
per meter of tank diameter, and the width of any portion of any gap shall not exceed 3.81
cm.
402.2 Inspection of Internal Floating Roof Stationary Storage Tanks with a Fixed Roof Covering:
a. The owner or operator of any internal floating roof stationary storage tank subject to this rule
shall visually inspect the tank and seals at least once every six (6) months to determine
ongoing compliance with the applicable standards of this rule pertaining to the tank. Records
of these inspections shall be maintained and shall be made available to the Control Officer
upon request.
b. The owner or operator of any stationary storage tank which uses an internal floating roof to
meet the vapor loss control system requirements of this rule shall conduct a visual inspection
each time the internal floating roof stationary storage tank is emptied and degassed or at least
once a year. The visual inspection can be made through manholes or rood hatches and shall
include all of the following:
(1) The internal floating roof shall not have an accumulation of liquid on the roof.
(2) The seal shall be attached.
(3) The seal shall not have any holes or tears.
402.3 Five Year Inspection and Empty Tank Inspection: The owner or operator of any stationary
storage tank which uses an internal floating roof to meet the vapor loss control system
requirements of this rule shall conduct a visual inspection each time the internal floating roof
stationary storage tank is emptied and degassed or at least once every five (5) years. The visual
inspection shall include all of the following:
a. The internal floating roof shall be free of any defects.
b. The primary seal shall not have any holes, tears or other openings.
c. The secondary seal if one is in service, shall not have any holes, tears or other openings.
d. Gaskets shall prevent liquid surfaces from exposure to atmosphere.
e. The slotted membrane shall not have more than a ten percent (10%) open area.
403 GASOLINE STORAGE TANK INSPECTIONS-AVAILABILITY TO CONTROL OFFICER:
403.1 Annual Inspections Of External Floating Roof Tanks: The owner or operator of any stationary
storage tank which uses an external floating roof to meet the vapor loss control system
requirements of this rule shall make the primary seal envelope and the secondary seal available for
unobstructed inspection by the Control Officer on an annual basis. The primary seal envelope shall
be made available for inspection at a minimum of four (4) locations selected along its
circumference at random by the Control Officer. If the Control Officer detects a violation as a
result of any such inspection, the Control Officer may require such further unobstructed inspection
of the seals as may be necessary to determine the seal condition for its entire circumference.
403.2 Annual Inspections Of Internal Floating Roof Tanks: The owner or operator of any stationary
storage tank which uses an internal floating roof to meet the vapor loss control
systemrequirements of this rule shall make the entire tank including the internal floating roof
available for inspection prior to filling. The internal floating roof shall be made available for visual
inspection through the manholes or roof hatches on the fixed covering on an annual basis.
403.3 Five-Year, Full Circumference Inspections: The owner or operator of a floating roof stationary
storage tank of 20,000 gallons (75,700 l) or more storing gasoline shall make the primary seal
envelope available for inspection by the Control Officer for its full length every five (5) years.
This inspection can be performed while the tank is in-service. However, if the secondary seal is
removed or if the tank is drained and cleaned by the owner or operator for any reason, it shall be

made available for such inspection at that time. The owner or operator shall provide notification to
the Control Officer no less than seven (7) working days prior to removal of the secondary seal.
403 404 OTHER AGENCIES’ REQUIREMENTS: Compliance with this rule does not relieve or otherwise affect
the owner’s or operator’s obligation to comply with any other applicable federal, state, or local legal
requirement including, but not limited to, rules promulgated by Arizona Department of Agriculture,
Weights and Measures Services Division, local fire department codes, and local zoning ordinances.
SECTION 500 - MONITORING AND RECORDS: In addition to any federal testing, monitoring and recording
requirements, an owner or operator of a bulk gasoline plant or bulk gasoline terminal shall comply with the
following:
501 LEAK DETECTION - TEST PROCEDURE: During loading into or unloading out of delivery vessels, the
peripheries of all potential sources of leakage at the loading facility are checked with a combustible gas detector or
organic vapor analyzer (OVA) as follows:
501.1 Pressure: A pressure tap shall be placed in the loading facility's vapor control system, as close as
possible to the delivery vessel's tank. The pressure shall be recorded periodically during testing, at
least once every minute. Instantaneous maximum pressure shall be recorded either automatically or
by visual observation. A pressure measurement device capable of measuring 20 inches (50.8 cm) of
water pressure with a precision of 0.1 (2.5 mm) inch of water shall be calibrated. This device shall fit
the tap and shall either be permanently installed or shall be kept available at all times at the facility.
501 DETERMINING VAPOR TIGHT STATUS: If a determination of vapor tight status is to be made during
the loading of a gasoline cargo tank, an owner or operator or Control Officer shall use one or more of the
methods listed in Section 501 of this rule.
501.1 Combustible Gas Detector (CGD) or Organic Vapor Analyzer (OVA) - Test Procedure: During
loading of gasoline cargo tanks, the peripheries of all potential sources of leakage at the gasoline
loading facility are checked with a CGD or OVA as follows:
501.2 a. Calibration: Within four (4) hours prior to monitoring, the combustible gas detector CGD or
OVA shall be properly calibrated with 10,600 ppm propane by volume in air for a 50 percent
lower explosive limit (LEL) response. for a 20 percent lower explosive limit (LEL) response or to
10,000 ppm with methane.
501.3 b. Probe Distance: The probe inlet shall be one (1) inch (2.5 cm) or less from the potential leak
source when searching for leaks. The probe inlet shall be one (1) inch (2.5 cm) from the leak
source when the highest detector reading is being determined for a discovered leak. When the
probe is obstructed from moving within one (1) inch (2.5 cm) of an actual or potential leak
source, the closest practicable probe distance shall be used.
501.4 c. Probe Movement: The probe shall be moved slowly, not faster than 1.6 inches per second (4
centimeters per second). If there is any meter deflection at a potential or actual an actual or
potential leak source, the probe shall be positioned to locate the point of highest meter response.
501.5 d. Probe Position: The probe inlet shall be positioned in the path of the vapor flow from a an actual
or potential leak such that the central axis of the probe-tube inlet shall be positioned coaxial with
the path of the most concentrated vapors.
501.6 e. Wind: Wind shall be blocked as much as possible from the space being monitored. The annual
leak detection test required by Section 401 of this rule shall be valid only when wind speed in the
space being monitored is five (5) mph or less.
501.7 f. Data Recording: The highest detector reading and location for each incidence of detected
leakage shall be recorded along with the date and time. If no gasoline vapor is detected, that fact
shall be entered into the record.
501.2 Method 21-Determination of Volatile Organic Compound Leaks, Alternative Screening
Procedure 8.3.3:
a. Spray a soap solution over all potential leak sources. The soap solution may be a
commercially available leak detection solution or may be prepared using concentrated

detergent and water. A pressure sprayer or squeeze bottle may be used to dispense the
solution.
b. Observe the potential leak sites to determine if any bubbles are formed.
(1) If no bubbles are observed, the source is presumed to have no detectable vapor leaks.
(2) If any bubbles are observed, the instrument techniques of Section 501.1 of this rule shall
be used to determine if a vapor leak exists.
501.3 Optical Gas Imaging: A certified operator of a calibrated optical gas imaging instrument may use
an optical gas imaging instrument to identify vapor leaks. If a vapor leak is detected, the
instrument techniques listed in Section 501.1 of this rule shall be used to determine if a vapor leak
exists.
501.4 Gasoline Cargo Tank Loading Pressure: During a performance test, a pressure tap shall be
placed in the gasoline loading facility's vapor loss control system, as close as possible to the gasoline
cargo tank. The pressure shall be recorded every five (5) minutes while a gasoline cargo tank is being
loaded. The highest instantaneous pressure that occurs during each loading shall be recorded. A
pressure measurement device capable of measuring 20 inches (50.8 cm) of water pressure with a
precision of 0.1 (2.5 mm) inch of water shall be calibrated. This device shall fit the tap and shall either
be permanently installed or shall be kept available at all times at the facility.
502 COMPLIANCE INSPECTIONS: The Control Officer, at any time, may monitor a delivery vessel gasoline
cargo tank vapor collection system, a loading rack's vapor loss control devices, a gasoline loading facility, or a
vapor collection/processing loss control system for vapor leaks by the methods described in Section 501 of this
rule or by applicable EPA Reference Methods specified in Section 504 of this rule.
503 RECORDS RETENTION: Records and information required by this rule shall be retained for at
least three five (5) years.
503.1 Vapor Pressure Records:
a. Bulk Gasoline Plant: An owner or operator of a stationary storage tank located at a bulk
gasoline plant shall keep accurate records of the following:
(1) The amount of gasoline stored in each tank.
(2) The Reid vapor pressure ranges of each such liquid.
(3) These records shall be kept for a minimum of five (5) years.
b. Bulk Gasoline Terminal: An owner or operator of a stationary storage tank located at a bulk
gasoline terminal shall keep accurate records of the following:
(1) The amount of gasoline stored in each tank.
(2) The temperature of the contents of each stationary storage tank subject to this rule, shall
be determined and recorded using at least one of the following methods:
(a) Take the actual temperature of the contents of the stationary storage tank each week
and record the weekly temperature of the contents of each stationary storage tank.
(b) Obtain the maximum local monthly average ambient temperature as reported by the
National Weather Service and record monthly for each stationary storage tank.
(c) Record monthly AP 42, Section 7.1 emission estimation procedures for each storage
tank.
(3) The Reid vapor pressure of the contents of each stationary storage tank shall be recorded
at least once each month.
(4) These records shall be kept for a minimum of five (5) years.

503.2 Leak Inspection Records: The owner or operator of a bulk gasoline plant or bulk gasoline
terminal shall keep a log book documenting each leak inspection. The log book shall include the
items listed below:
a. The owner or operator shall sign the log book at the completion of each monthly inspection
for equipment leaks.
b. Each monthly inspection log shall contain a list, summary description or diagram(s) showing
the location of all equipment at the bulk gasoline plant or bulk gasoline terminal.
c. Each monthly inspection log shall include any maintenance that occurred.
d. Each annual inspection log shall include any maintenance that occurred.
e. For an external floating roof, record the seal gap measurements, including the raw data
obtained and any calculations performed.
f. The date the stationary storage tank was removed from service, if applicable.
g. These records shall be kept for a minimum of five (5) years.
h. Additional recordkeeping requirements for use of optical gas imaging instruments: An owner
or operator using an optical gas imaging instrument for leak inspections shall date and time
stamp the video records of every monitoring event where an optical gas imaging instrument
was used.
504 COMPLIANCE DETERMINATION - TEST METHODS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE: When
more than one test method is permitted for a determination, an exceedance of the limits established in this rule
determined by any of the applicable test methods constitutes a violation of this rule. The following test
methods are approved for use for the purpose of determining compliance with this rule. The test methods
are incorporated by reference in Appendix G of the Maricopa County Air Pollution Control Regulations.
Alternative test methods as approved by the Administrator or other EPA-approved test methods may be
used upon prior written approval from the Control Officer. When more than one test method is permitted
for the same determination, an exceedance under any method will constitute a violation. Copies of test
methods referenced in this section are available at the Maricopa County Air Quality Department, 1001 N.
Central Avenue, Suite 125, Phoenix, AZ 85004-1942.
504.1 EPA Test Methods:
a. EPA Method 2A - Direct Measurement of Gas Volume Through Pipes and Small Ducts.
b. EPA Method 2B—Determination of Exhaust Gas Volume Flow Rate from Gasoline Vapor
Incinerators.
c. EPA Method 18 - Measurement of Gaseous Organic Compound Emissions by Gas
Chromatography.
d. EPA Method 21 - Determination of Volatile Organic Compound Leaks.
e. EPA Method 21-Determination of Volatile Organic Compound Leaks, Alternative Screening
Procedure 8.3.3
f. EPA Method 25A - Determination of Total Gaseous Organic Concentration Using a Flame
Ionization Analyzer.
g. EPA Method 25B- Determination of Total Gaseous Organic Concentration Using a
Nondispersive Infrared Analyzer.
h. EPA Method 27 - Determination of Vapor Tightness of Gasoline Delivery Tank Using
Pressure Vacuum Test.
i. Optical Gas Imaging: Alternative Work Practice for Monitoring Equipment Leaks, 40 CFR
60.18(g). An owner or operator may use an Optical Gas Imaging instrument to comply with
the alternative work practice requirements in 40 CFR 40.18(g) instead of using the 40 CFR
60, Appendix A-7, Method 21 monitor to identify leaking equipment.

j. AP 42, Fifth Edition, Volume I, Chapter 7: Liquid Storage Tanks, November 2006, errata
August 2012.
504.2 California Air Resources Board (CARB) Test Procedures:
a. TP-201.1E Leak Rate and Cracking Pressure of Pressure/Vacuum Vent Valves, October 8,
2003.
504.3 ASTM Standards
a. ASTM D323-15a “Standard Test Method for Vapor Pressure of Petroleum Products (Reid
Method).
b. ASTM D2879-10 Standard Test Method for Vapor Pressure-Temperature Relationship and
Initial Decomposition Temperature of Liquids by Isoteniscope.
c. ASTM D4953-15 “Standard Test Method for Vapor Pressure of Gasoline and Gasoline-
Oxygenate Blends (Dry Method).
d. ASTM D5191-15 “Standard Test Method for Vapor Pressure of Petroleum Products (Mini
Method).”
e. ASTM D6420-99 (Reapproved 2004), Standard Test Method for Determination of Gaseous
Organic Compounds by Direct Interface Gas Chromatography-Mass Spectrometry.
504.4 American Petroleum Institute Standard API STD 650 Welded Tanks for Oil Storage, Twelfth
Edition, Includes Errata 1 (2013), Errata 2 (2014), and Addendum 1 (2014).
504.1 Vapor Collection/Processing System: Control efficiency of a vapor collection/processing system shall
be determined according to EPA Reference Method 25A or Method 25B subsequent to the Control
Officer's approval of the test protocol. Leak tests to verify a gas-tight state of the equipment
associated with the vapor collection/processing device, including the piping outside of the loading
area, shall be conducted according to EPA Reference Method 21. Gas volume flow rates shall be
determined by Method 2B for a thermal oxidizer; otherwise, by Method 2A.
504.2 Vapor Balance And Loading Systems: Vapor tightness shall be determined using the method
described in Section 501 of this rule.
504.3 True Vapor Pressure shall be determined by ASTM Method 2879-83 and by temperature
measurement under actual conditions using an instrument accurate to within ±1 degree Fahrenheit or
±0.5 degree Celsius. For purposes of recording and reporting, the Reid vapor pressure and the
foregoing temperature determination may be used in conjunction with the method of American
Petroleum Institute Bulletin 2517, February, 1980, to determine true vapor pressure, unless the
Control Officer specifies ASTM Method 2879-83.
504.4 Reid Vapor Pressure shall be determined by ASTM Method D 323-82 or by ASTM Method D 5191

Return to list of attachments
MARICOPA COUNTY BOARD OF HEALTH MEETING MINUTES
Monday, April 25, 2016
301 W. Jefferson Street, 10th Floor
Phoenix, Arizona 85003
Board of Supervisors Conference Room
President Kip Steill called the meeting to order at 3:09 p.m.
ROLL CALL:
Members Present: Members Excused:
Don Cassano Scott Somers
Nedra Halley Francisca Montoya
Andrew Kunasek
Debra Baldauff
Kip Steill
Don Hughes
Robert MacMillan
Michael Mills, M.D. (via phone)
Ex-Officio: Bob England, M.D.
CALL TO THE PUBLIC:
Mr. Kip Steill announced it was time for a call to the public and requested public comment forms
for those who wanted to speak or who wanted to address any action items.
Supervisor Kunasek introduced the newest Board of Health member, Mr. MacMillan.
DISCUSSION/ACTION ITEMS
1. Election of Board of Health Vice President:
Mr. Don Hughes was nominated as Vice President of the Board of Health. A motion was made by
Mr. Don Cassano and seconded by Ms. Nedra Halley and all were in favor. The motion passed
unanimously.
2. Approval of Minutes: President Steill asked for a motion to approve the minutes from the BOH
Meeting held on January 25, 2016. Motion was made by Ms. Nedra Halley to approve the BOH
minutes as presented. Motion was seconded by Mr. Don Cassano and the motion passed
unanimously.
3. Approval of Public Health FY 17 OMB Budget Recommendation Mr. Scot Pitcairn
The Board of Health Finance Committee recommended that the Board of Health approve Public
Health’s FY 17 OMB Budget Recommendation. Mr. Pitcairn was available to answer any questions
that the Board of Health had. Motion was made by Mr. Don Hughes to approve Public Health’s FY
17 OMB budget recommendation. Motion was seconded by Mr. Don Cassano and the motion
passed unanimously.
4. Approval of Environmental Services FY 17 OMB Budget Recommendation Ms. Diane Cabanillas
The Board of Health Finance Committee recommended that the Board of Health approve
Environmental Services’ FY 17 OMB Budget Recommendation. Ms. Cabanillas was available to
answer any questions that the Board of Health had. Motion was made by Mr. Don Hughes to
1

approve Environmental Services FY 17 OMB budget recommendation. Motion was seconded by Mr.
Halley and the motion passed unanimously.
5. Approval of the initiation of regulatory change for the ozone-related Mr. Philip A. McNeely
rulemakings
The rules being revised regarding ozone are the following:
Rule 241: Minor New Source Review
Rule 322: Power Plant Operations
Rule 323: Fuel Burning Equipment from Industrial/Commercial/Institutional Sources
Rule 324: Stationary Internal Combustion (IC) Engines
Rule 336: Surface Coating Operations
Rule 342: Coating Wood Furniture and Fixtures
Rule 350: Storage of Organic Liquids at Bulk Plants and Terminals
Rule 351: Loading of Organic Liquids
Rule 352: Gasoline Delivery Vessel Testing and Use
Rule 353: Gasoline In Stationary Dispensing Tanks
These rules are being closed for public comment and will be published May 13th. If there is no
further comment, the rules will go to the Board of Supervisors for a hearing. These rules are in
regards to non-attainment for the ozone standards. These rules are due to the EPA January 1, 2017
and have gone through the EROP/stakeholder meeting process. Every facility that has a permit will
receive information when rule changes are occurring via email. For more information on the
regulatory process: http://www.maricopa.gov/regulations/default.aspx
Motion was made by Mr. Don Cassano to approve the initiation of regulatory change for the
ozone-related rulemakings. Motion was seconded by Ms. Nedra Halley and the motion passed
unanimously.
6. Fee Waiver Applications Mr. Ken Conklin
Mr. Ken Conklin presented thirty-two (32) fee waivers for review and consideration of approval. A
summary sheet document was provided.
Motion to approve the 32 Fee Waiver applications was made by Ms. Nedra Halley, seconded by
Mr. Don Cassano and all were in favor. Motion passed unanimously.
Discussion Items:
1. Public Health Report: Dr. Bob England
i. Human Resources
ii. Communication
iii. Infrastructure
iv. Strategic Planning
v. Programs
vi. Disease Update
vii. Future Topics
Dr. Bob provided the Board of Health with the updated Public Health org chart. The re-org has
aligned MCDPH into programmatic divisions. Previously, MCDPH was organized by funding stream.
Dr. Bob briefed the board on funding cuts that the department is receiving, including a $300,000
cut to WIC and $230,000 cut to the Office of Preparedness and Response (CDC is pulling some
money back for the Zika response). WIC is struggling to meet a target number of clients but each
time the program doesn’t meet the target, the number of target clients and funding is decreased.
The reason for difficulties with reaching the target number of client is that client encounter has
2

become increasingly more complex. The Office of Vital Records is moving their St. Mary’s Food
Bank location to a location near the 1-17 and Dunlap. MCDPH is no longer tracking returning
travelers from ebola stricken countries. Arizona has experienced the highest level of severity in the
country for flu for hospitalization and death rates. CDC is gathering data but there may not be
enough lab evidence to determine a cause. Zika virus is another of the flaviviruses that is associated
with significant neurological defects in infants whose mothers were infected with the virus in the
first two trimesters of pregnancy. The primary vector is Aedes Aegypti mosquitos. In Maricopa
County, there is no endemic spread of zika; only one travel associated case. The strategy when
there is a travel associated case is to have the individual stay inside, wear repellant, and when
necessary, have Environmental Services do traps and remediation depending on consent. There is
concern regarding the process and timeline it would take to enter private property if necessary to
spray for this type of mosquito. The Surgeon General will be visiting Arizona in May to do a tour on
opioid use. The NACCHO Annual meeting will be July 19 – 21 in Phoenix.
ANNOUNCEMENTS AND CURRENT EVENTS
 Next meeting is July 25, 2016
ADJOURNMENT: There being no further business, motion to adjourn the meeting was made by Mr.
Don Cassano, seconded by Ms. Halley and motion was passed unanimously. The meeting was
adjourned at 4:27 p.m.
3

Copies of all written and electronic Stakeholder input
Return to list of attachments

Return to list of attachments


Return to list of attachments
Executive Summary
of the Report to the Board of Supervisors
Prepared by the Maricopa County Air Quality Department
Board Hearing Date: November 2, 2016
Case #/Title: AQ-2015-008-Rule 352 (Gasoline Delivery Vessel Testing And Use)
Agenda Item:
Supervisor Districts: All Districts
The Maricopa County Air Quality Department (department) complied with all statutory and county policies
throughout this rulemaking process. Per the Enhanced Regulatory Outreach Program (EROP) Policy: “In addition
to the required staff report, an executive summary of the report including an overview of stakeholder input and
staff responses will be provided to the Board of Supervisors at least one week prior to any Board of Supervisors’
public hearing.”
Overview Of The Report To The Board Of Supervisors:
The department is requesting the Board of Supervisors to approve amendments to Maricopa County Air Pollution
Control Regulations regarding Rule 352 (Gasoline Delivery Vessel Testing And Use) and approve submitting the
amended rules as a revision to the (Arizona) State Implementation Plan (SIP).
The purpose of this rulemaking is to update the rule to use current industry language, update test methods, and
clarify the loading requirements for bulk terminals, bulk plants and gasoline dispensing facilities. In addition, the
proposed revisions to Rule 352 will address the requirements of the SIP for “moderate” nonattainment for the
2008 eight-hour ozone national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS). The proposed amendments in Rule 352
include Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT) for volatile organic compounds (VOCs).
Overview Of Stakeholder Input And Staff Responses:
Three Stakeholder Workshops were held: June 30, 2015, September 14, 2015, and February 22, 2016. Workshop
discussions included the following:
• Clarification of the definitions of “bulk tank” and “bulk terminal”
• Clarification of pressure testing requirements for cargo tanks
• Clarification of the rule’s applicability to a cargo tank that only loads aviation gasoline
A 30-day comment period was held May-June 2016. During the 30-day comment period, the department did not
receive any written comments.
The department discussed the comments (raised during the workshops) with Stakeholders and reached an
equitable consensus regarding how the comments should be addressed. The department addressed all of the
comments; responses have been incorporated into the draft rule and are explained in the Preamble of the Draft
Notice of Final Rulemaking.

Return to list of attachments
Report to the Board of Supervisors
Prepared by the Maricopa County Air Quality Department
Board of Health Meeting Date: April 25, 2016
Board Hearing Date: November 2, 2016
Case #/Title: AQ-2015-008-Rule 352 (Gasoline Delivery Vessel Testing And Use)
Agenda Item:
Supervisor Districts: All Districts
Applicant: Staff
Request: Approve amendments to Maricopa County Air Pollution Control
Regulations regarding Rule 352 (Gasoline Delivery Vessel Testing and
Use) and approve submitting the amended rule as a revision to the
(Arizona) State Implementation Plan (SIP).
The purpose of this rulemaking is to revise the rule to use current
industry language, update test methods, and clarify the loading
requirements for bulk terminals, bulk plants and gasoline dispensing
facilities. In addition, the proposed revisions to Rule 352 will address the
requirements of the SIP for “moderate” nonattainment for the 2008 eight-
hour ozone national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS). The
proposed amendments in Rule 352 include Reasonably Available Control
Technology (RACT) for volatile organic compounds (VOCs).
Support/Opposition: During the 30-day comment period, the department did not receive any
written comments.
Staff
Recommendation: Approve
Board of Health
Recommendation: Approve per Staff recommended language
Additional
Comments: This regulatory change is following the Enhanced Regulatory Outreach
Program (EROP) Policy and workflow process. The County Manager
briefed the Board of Supervisors regarding this rulemaking in May 2015.
Stakeholder workshops were held June 2015 through February 2016. On
April 25, 2016, the Board of Health approved this regulatory change for
the Expedited Process.
Presented By: Philip A. McNeely, R.G., Director
Prepared By: Hether Krause
Attachments: Summary of the proposed regulatory change (See Item 6 of the Draft
Notice of Final Rulemaking)

Analysis of input received during the process and how that input was
responded to (No comments were received; see Item 13 of the Draft
Notice of Final Rulemaking)
Language of proposed regulatory change or amendment (See Item 17 of
the Draft Notice of Final Rulemaking)
Preamble required by Arizona Revised Statutes (A.R.S.) § 49-471.05
(See Draft Notice of Final Rulemaking)
Minutes from Board of Health meeting
Copies of all written and electronic Stakeholder input (No comments
were received)
Signed copy of the Maricopa County Resolution “Moratorium on
Increased Regulatory Burdens”

Return to list of attachments
DRAFT NOTICE OF PROPOSED FINAL RULEMAKING
MARICOPA COUNTY AIR POLLUTION CONTROL REGULATIONS
REGULATION III – CONTROL OF AIR CONTAMINANTS
RULE 352: GASOLINE DELIVERY VESSEL TESTING AND USE
PREAMBLE
1. Rule affected Rulemaking action
Rule 352: Gasoline Delivery Vessel Testing and Use Amended
2. Statutory authority for the rulemaking:
Authorizing statutes: A.R.S. §§ 49-474, 49-479, and 49-480
Implementing Statute: A.R.S. § 49-112
3. The effective date of the rule:
Tentative date of adoption: November 2, 2016
4. List of public notices addressing this rulemaking:
Notice of Briefing to Maricopa County Manager: May 2015
Notice of Stakeholder Workshops: June 30, 2015, September 14, 2015, and February 22, 2016
Notice of Maricopa County Board of Health Meeting: April 25, 2016
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking: 22 A.A.R. 1242, May 13, 2016
5. Name and address of department personnel with whom persons may communicate regarding the
rulemaking:
Name: Cheri Dale or Hether Krause
Maricopa County Air Quality Department
Planning and Analysis Division
Address: 1001 N Central Avenue, Suite 125
Phoenix, Arizona 85004
Telephone: (602) 506-6010
Fax: (602) 506-6179
E-mail: aqplanning@mail.maricopa.gov Return to list of attachments
6. Explanation of the rule, including the department's reasons for initiating the rulemaking:
Summary: Rule 352 (Gasoline Delivery Vessel Testing and Use) limits the emission of volatile organic
compounds (VOCs) from gasoline delivery vessels and applies to any gasoline delivery vessel used to
receive or deliver gasoline within Maricopa County. Rule 352 also applies to all persons who own, operate,
maintain, repair or test the delivery vessel.
Maricopa County Air Pollution Control Regulation, Rule 352, was last revised over fifteen years ago. The
revisions to Rule 352 updated the rule to use current industry language; updated test methods; and clarified
the loading requirements for bulk terminals, bulk plants and gasoline dispensing facilities. In addition, the
revisions to Rule 352 addressed the requirements of the State Implementation Plan (SIP) for “moderate”
nonattainment for the 2008 eight-hour ozone national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS).
Background: As early at the 1960’s, the Maricopa County Health Department (as the department was then
called), Air Pollution Control regulations, Section IV, Handling of Materials, Regulation 1, required
“Material such as…gasoline or other volatile compounds…be kept, processed, used, and transported in
such a manner and by such means that they will not unreasonably leak, escape, evaporate or be otherwise

discharged into the ambient air so as to cause or contribute to air pollution…” This early rulemaking
established the basis for the current Rule 350. In 1970, the passage of the Clean Air Act established federal
air quality standards.
Congress established the basic structure of the Clean Air Act (CAA) in 1970. The CAA requires the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to establish national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) for
common and widespread pollutants based on the most current science available. For areas that were
determined to be in nonattainment of the NAAQS, the state was required to adopt federally enforceable
state implementation plans (SIP) in order to achieve and maintain air quality and meet the federally
established air quality standards (the NAAQS)2. The states were responsible for developing and
implementing rules that require reasonably available control technology (RACT) for sources of VOCs
located in the designated ozone nonattainment areas. Local air agencies were required to establish RACT
for source categories not already covered by EPA's Control Techniques Guidelines (CTGs) as well as
tighten RACT for source categories for which RACT had already been defined in the NAAQS3. EPA
defined RACT as “the lowest emission limitation that a particular source is capable of meeting by the
application of control technology that is reasonably available considering technological and economic
feasibility” (44 FR 53762; September 17, 1979).
In the 1970’s, using the EPA NAAQS and CTGs to identify the established RACT standards, the Maricopa
County Bureau of Air Pollution Control (as the department was then called) revised and renumbered the
county air pollution rules and regulations. The revised county rules established specific requirements for
petroleum products in Regulation III, Rule 33: Storage and Handling of Petroleum Products.
On March 3, 1978, EPA promulgated a list of ozone nonattainment areas under the provisions of the Clean
Air Act, as amended in 1977 (1977 CAA or pre-amended Act). Maricopa County was included on such list
43 FR 8964, March 3, 1978). On February 24, 1984, EPA notified the Governor of Arizona, that the
Maricopa County Air Pollution Control District’s (MCAPCD), as the department was then called) portion
of the Arizona SIP was inadequate and requested that deficiencies in the existing SIP be corrected (EPA's
SIP-Call, 49 FR 18827, May 3, 1984). The MCAPCD was in the process of revising Rule 33 to create
Rules 350, 351, 352, and 353 to address the RACT requirements when EPA again notified the Governor of
Arizona (May 26, 1988) that MCAPCD's portion of the Arizona SIP was inadequate and requested that
deficiencies relating to VOC controls and the application of RACT in the existing SIP be corrected (EPA's
second SIP-Call, 53 FR 34500, September 7, 1988).
On November 15, 1990, the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 were enacted. In an amended section of
the CAA, Congress statutorily adopted the requirement that nonattainment areas fix their deficient RACT
rules and established a deadline of May 15, 1991 for states to submit corrections of those deficiencies. The
MCAPCD further revised Rules 350, 351, 352, and 353 to meet the RACT standards. Rule 350 (Storage of
Organic Liquids at Bulk Plants), revised July 13, 1988, and April 6, 1992, was approved by the EPA
effective October 5, 1995 (60 FR 46024). Rule 351(Loading Organic Liquids) revised July 13, 1988 and
November 16, 1992, was approved effective October 5, 1995 (60 FR 46024). Rule 352 (Gasoline Delivery
Vessel Testing and Use), revised July 13, 1988, and November 16, 1992, was approved effective October
5, 1995, (60 FR 46024). Rule 353 (Transfer of Gasoline into Stationary Dispensing Tanks) revised July 13,
1988, and April 6, 1992, was approved effective March 4, 1996 (61 FR 3578).
More recently, EPA developed national emission standards for hazardous air pollutants (NESHAPS) for
Source Category: Gasoline Distribution Bulk Terminals, Bulk Plants, and Pipeline Facilities (73 FR 1933,
Jan. 10, 2008); a NESHAP for Gasoline-Dispensing Facilities (73 FR 1945, Jan. 10, 2008); and the
NESHAP for Organic Liquid Distribution (non-gasoline) (69 FR 5063, Feb. 3, 2004). These NESHAPS are
often referred to as the maximum achievable control technology (MACT) standards since they were
developed to reflect the maximum achievable degree of HAP emission reduction. New MACT standards
required additional or new emissions testing requirements reflecting the new technologies. New and revised
test methods and leak detection methods were required in these MACT standards. Although the MACT
standards typically apply to large sources, there are test methods and other good practices that are or may
be applicable to small area sources of VOC emissions. Both MACT standards included requirements for
gasoline cargo tanks, the industry term now used for delivery vessels.
Rule 352 Rulemaking Background: Rule 352 was revised in 1992 and 1999 in order for the county to
comply with RACT and other policy statements published by the EPA. In 2013, a limited scope rulemaking

clarified the definition of volatile organic compounds within all of the Maricopa County Air Quality rules.
In this rulemaking, the Maricopa County Air Quality Department (department) is revising rule language to
improve the clarity of the gasoline loading requirements and to update test methods. This rulemaking
includes revisions to improve the clarity and enforceability of the regulatory requirements for gasoline
cargo tanks.
Other revisions included in this rulemaking are the relocation of any exemptions previously in Section 300
to a new section in Section 100, the inclusion of definitions specific to the gasoline industry and in line
with terms defined the Code of Federal Regulations, the clarification of the regulatory requirements for
loading gasoline at bulk terminals, bulk plants and gasoline dispensing facilities, an increase in the amount
of notification time in advance of gasoline cargo tank testing, and the addition of the use of optical gas
imaging as an alternative work practice to monitor and identify leaking equipment.
Issues Raised and Discussed During this Rulemaking Process:
Prior to Stakeholder workshops, one Stakeholder submitted a written request to the department concerning
the notification time for testing of gasoline cargo tanks. Rule 352 requires the owner or operator or tester of
a gasoline cargo tank to notify the Control Officer “…no more than 24 hours in advance of [vapor
tightness] testing.” The Stakeholder expressed concern that gasoline cargo tanks operating in different
regulatory jurisdictions require different notification requirements; this presented a challenge for the
Stakeholder when conducting vapor tightness testing for gasoline cargo tanks that operate outside of
Maricopa County. The department acknowledged this “challenge presented by the inconsistency of our [the
department] testing notification periods compared to those required by other jurisdictions.” (Department
letter to Massey’s Truck and Tank Repair, June 11, 2014) At that time, the department conditionally agreed
to allow the notification time of up to 72 hours in advance of the gasoline cargo tank testing. This rule
revision now allows up to 72 hours notification time prior to gasoline cargo tank testing.
The department held three Stakeholder workshops: June 30, 2015, September 14, 2016, and February 22,
2016. Stakeholders included representatives from APS, Caljet, CDM Smith, Cemex, City of Glendale, City
of Mesa, City of Phoenix, Coastal Transport, EnCore Consulting, Envirosure Solutions, Kiewit, Kinder
Morgan, Luke Air Force Base, Pinal County, Ping, Polar Services, SRP, Tamura Environmental,
Washington Elementary School, and EPA.
The current definitions of “bulk tank” and “bulk terminal” were confusing. Stakeholders recommended
clarification of the terms and their applicability to be consistent throughout the department’s rules that
pertain to gasoline. The department acknoweledged the inconsistencies between the “gasoline rules” and
revised the rules accordingly.
Stakeholders questioned if non-gasoline cargo tanks were subject to the required pressure testing
requirements of Rule 352. The rule did not seem clear if there were any exceptions to this pressure test
requirement. Rule 352, Section 305.1 does provide an exemption from the pressure testing requirements if
a gasoline cargo tank meets all of the conditions listed in the section. The rule retains the same exemptions
previously found in Section 305.1 and now found in Section 103 (Partial Exemptions). Additional
questions were asked concerning the rule’s applicability to a cargo tank that only loads aviation gasoline.
The MACT standards that include requirements for cargo tanks exempt the following: “…transfer of
aviation gasoline within the airport, is not subject to this subpart. (40 CFR 63.11081(d) and 40 CFR
63.11111(g)).” Maricopa County included an exemption from Rule 352 for cargo tanks that load only the
following fuels: aviation fuel, diesel fuel and liquefied petroleum gas.
Description of Rule 352 Amendments:
Amended the following throughout the rule:
 Changed the term “transfer” to “loading”
 Changed the term “delivery vessel” to “gasoline cargo tank”
 Deleted the word “person” and inset the words “owner or operator”
 Deleted past compliance dates
 Added or revised specific rule section references

Amended the following in Section 100:
 Revised Section 101 (Purpose)
 Revised Section 102 (Applicability)
 Added Section 103 (Exemptions)
Amended the following in Section 200:
 Deleted the definition 2-POINT SYSTEM
 Added the definition AVIATION GASOLINE (AVGAS)
 Added the definition BULK GASOLINE PLANT
 Added the definition BULK GASOLINE TERMINAL
 Added the definition COAXIAL VAPOR BALANCE SYSTEM
 Added the definition DUAL-POINT VAPOR BALANCE SYSTEM
 Revised the definition of EXCESS GASOLINE DRAINAGE
 Revised the definition of GASOLINE
 Deleted the definition GASOLINE DELIVERY VESSEL
 Added the definition GASOLINE CARGO TANK
 Added the definition GASOLINE DISPENSING FACILITY
 Revised the definition of LEAK FREE
 Revised the definition of MARICOPA COUNTY (MC) PRESSURE VAPOR TIGHTNESS TEST
 Revised the definition of PURGING
 Revised the definition of STAGE 1 VAPOR RECOVERY SYSTEM (VR SYSTEM)
 Added the definition SUBMERGED FILL
 Revised the definition of SWITCH LOADING
Amended the following in Section 300:
 Deleted Section 301 PREVENT LEAKS AND SPILLS
 Deleted Section 302 GASOLINE DELIVERY VESSEL LEAK TEST REQUIRED
 Deleted Section 303 DISPLAY A VALID DECAL
 Deleted Section 304 PURGING PROHIBITED
 Deleted Section 305 EXEMPTIONS
 Added Section 301 GASOLINE CARGO TANK REQUIREMENTS
 Added Section 301.1 Gasoline Cargo Tank Integrity
 Added Section 301.2 Maricopa County Air Pollution Vapor Tightness Certification
 Added Section 301.3 Purging
 Added Section 302 LOADING OF GASOLINE
 Added Section 302.1 Loading of Gasoline into a Gasoline Cargo Tank from a Bulk Plant
 Added Section 302.2 Loading of Gasoline at a Bulk Terminal
 Added Section 302.3 Loading of Gasoline into a Stationary Gasoline Storage Tank at a Non-Retail
Gasoline Dispensing Facility

 Added Section 302.4 Loading of Gasoline into a Stationary Gasoline Storage Tank at a Retail Gasoline
Dispensing Facility
Amended the following in Section 400:
 Revised Section 401 MARICOPA COUNTY AIR POLLUTION VAPOR TIGHTNESS TESTING
 Revised Section 401.1 Notification of Required Testing
 Revised Section 401.2 Registration
 Revised Section 401.3 Expiration
 Revised Section 401.4 Loss, Defaced or Destroyed Maricopa County Vapor Tightness Certification
Decal
 Revised Section 402 TIME FRAME FOR INSTALLATION OF CONTROL DEVICE
Amended the following in Section 500:
 Renumbered Section 501 RECORDKEEPING AND REPORTING REQUIREMENTS to Section 502
 Added Section 501 GASOLINE CARGO TANK VAPOR TIGHTNESS TESTING REQUIREMENT
 Renumbered Section 502 MONITORING FOR LEAKS to Section 503
 Added Section 503.1 Combustible Gas Detector or an Organic Vapor Analyzer (OVA)
 Added Section 503.1 Method 21-Determination of Volatile Organic Compound Leaks, Alternative
Screening Procedure 8.3.3
 Added Section 503.3 Optical Gas Imaging
 Renumbered Section 503 COMPLIANCE to Section 504
 Renumbered Section 504 TEST METHODS to Section 505
 Added Section 505.1 Optical Gas Imaging
 Added Section 505.2 EPA Method 21
 Renumbered Section 504.1 EPA Method 27 to Section 505.3
 Renumbered Section 504.2 Americal Society for Testing Materials…to Section 505.4 and revised
 Renumbered Section 504.3 Test of Internal Vapor Valves to Section 505.5
 Renumbered Section 504.4 Delivery Vessel Vapor Tightness Test to Section 505.6
7. Demonstration of compliance with A.R.S. §49-112:
Under A.R.S. § 49-479(C), a county may not adopt a rule or ordinance that is more stringent than the rules
adopted by the Director of the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ) for similar sources
unless it demonstrates compliance with the applicable requirements of A.R.S. §49-112.
§ 49-112 County regulation; standards
§ 49-112(A)
When authorized by law, a county may adopt a rule, ordinance or other regulation that is more stringent
than or in addition to a provision of this title or rule adopted by the director or any board or commission
authorized to adopt rules pursuant to this title if all of the following conditions are met:
1. The rule, ordinance or other regulation is necessary to address a peculiar local condition.
2. There is credible evidence that the rule, ordinance or other regulation is either;
(a) Necessary to prevent a significant threat to public health or the environment that results from a
peculiar local condition and is technically and economically feasible.

(b) Required under a federal statute or regulation, or authorized pursuant to an intergovernmental
agreement with the federal government to enforce federal statutes or regulations if the county rule,
ordinance or other regulation is equivalent to federal statutes or regulation.
3. Any fee or tax adopted under the rule, ordinance or other regulation will not exceed the reasonable
costs of the county to issue and administer that permit or plan approval program.
§ 49-112(B)
When authorized by law, a county may adopt rules, ordinances or other regulations in lieu of a state
program that are as stringent as a provision of this title or rule adopted by the director or any board or
commission authorized to adopt rules pursuant to this title if the county demonstrates that the cost of
obtaining permits or other approvals from the county will approximately equal or be less than the fee or
cost of obtaining similar permits or approvals under this title or any rule adopted pursuant to this title. If the
state has not adopted a fee or tax for similar permits or approvals, the county may adopt a fee when
authorized by law in the rule, ordinance or other regulation that does not exceed the reasonable costs of the
county to issue and administer that permit or plan approval program.
The department complies with A.R.S. § 49-112(A) in that Maricopa County fails to meet the National
Ambient Air Quality Standards for both ozone and particulates. The County failed to meet 2008 8-hour
ozone standard by the marginal area attainment date of July 20, 2015. The EPA issued a final rule, effective
June 3, 2016, reclassifying the Maricopa County area to “moderate” (published at 86 FR 26697, May 4,
2016). Further, a portion of the County was classified as a serious ozone nonattainment area under the
previous 1-hour ozone standard requiring the County to continue to maintain the measures and
requirements that allowed the county to attain that standard. Currently, a portion of Maricopa County and
Apache Junction in Pinal County is designated serious nonattainment for the PM10 24-hour standard. This
is the only serious PM10 nonattainment area in Arizona. Revisions to Rule 350 address the requirements of
the State Implementation Plan (SIP) for “moderate” nonattainment for the 2008 eight-hour ozone national
ambient air quality standard (NAAQS). The amendments in Rule 352 include Reasonably Available
Control Technology (RACT).
The department complies with A.R.S. § 49-112(B) in that the amendments to Rule 352 are not more
stringent than or in addition to a provision of Title 49 or rule adopted by the director or any board or
commission authorized to adopt rules pursuant to Title 49, address the peculiar local conditions in
Maricopa County, are authorized under A.R.S. Title 49, Chapter 3, Article 3, and are not in lieu of a state
program.
8. Documents or studies referenced and/or reviewed for this rulemaking:
Not applicable
9. Showing of good cause why the rule is necessary to promote a statewide interest if the rule will
diminish a previous grant of authority of a political subdivision:
Not applicable
10. Summary of the economic, small business, and consumer impact:
The following discussion addresses each of the elements required for an economic, small business and
consumer impact statement under A.R.S. § 41-1055. The economic summary is based on the number of
Title V and Non-Title V permits issued by the Maricopa County Air Quality Department.
An identification of the rulemaking.
This rulemaking revised Rule 352 (Gasoline Delivery Vessel Testing and Use). The revised rule will be
titled: Gasoline Cargo Tank Testing and Use.
An identification of the persons who will be directly affected by, bear the costs of or directly benefit
from the rulemaking.
The persons who will be directly affected by and bear the costs of this rulemaking to revised Rule 352
will be facilities in Maricopa County that have a gasoline cargo tank which is used to load gasoline,
and to all persons who own, operate, maintain, repair, or test such a gasoline cargo tank. Revised Rule

352 does not impose new requirements on facilities that provide or receive testing per Rule 352 and no
costs would be incurred for compliance with the rule revisions.
A cost benefit analysis of the following:
(a) The probable costs and benefits to the implementing agency and other agencies directly affected
by the implementation and enforcement of the rulemaking.
Because this rulemaking does not impose any new compliance burdens on permitted regulated entities
or introduce additional regulatory requirements, the department deemed that none of the revisions have
potentially significant economic impacts on permitted sources. It is expected that the department will
benefit from the increased clarity of the rule with decreased time to inspect a facility or prepare a
permit. In addition, the rulemaking will not impose increased monetary or regulatory costs on other
state agencies, political subdivisions of this state, persons, or individuals so regulated.
The benefits of the rule revision are anticipated to be a result of the following changes:
- Adding definitions specific to the gasoline industry and in line with terms defined the Code of
Federal Regulations;
- Clarifying the regulatory requirements for loading gasoline at bulk terminals, bulk plants and
gasoline dispensing facilities;
- Increasing the amount of notification time in advance of gasoline cargo tank testing;
- Adding optical gas imaging as an alternative work practice to monitor and identify leaking
equipment.
Revised Rule 352 does not impose new requirements on facilities that provide testing per Rule 352 and
no costs would be incurred for compliance with the rule revisions.
(b) The probable costs and benefits to a political subdivision of this state directly affected by the
implementation and enforcement of the rulemaking
The rule revisions will not impose increased monetary or regulatory costs on other state agencies,
political subdivisions of this state, persons, or individuals so regulated.
(c) The probable costs and benefits to businesses directly affected by the rulemaking, including any
anticipated effect on the revenues or payroll expenditures of employers who are subject to the
rulemaking.
The department anticipates that increased clarity provided by the Rule 352 revisions will provide a
benefit to the regulated community; it will take less time for sources subject to the rule to understand
and comply with the rule, which leads to increased compliance, which leads to decreased costs of
compliance to the regulated community. The department does not anticipate these rule revisions to
have a significant impact on a person's income, revenue, or employment in this state related to this
activity. The rule revision will not impose increased monetary or regulatory costs on individuals so
regulated.
A general description of the probable impact on private and public employment in businesses,
agencies and political subdivisions of this state directly affected by the rulemaking.
The rule revisions will not impose increased monetary or regulatory costs on other state agencies, political
subdivisions of this state, persons, or individuals so regulated.
A statement of the probable impact of the rulemaking on small businesses.
The rule revisions will not impose increased monetary or regulatory costs on any permitted business,
persons, or individuals so regulated.
(a) An identification of the small businesses subject to the rulemaking.
Small businesses subject to this rulemaking are those facilities in Maricopa County that have a
gasoline cargo tank which is used to load gasoline, and own, operate, maintain, repair, or test such a
gasoline cargo tank.

(b) The administrative and other costs required for compliance with the rulemaking.
This rulemaking updates and clarifies existing rule provisions and definitions to be consistent with
federal performance standards; and to reduce confusion and improve understanding and readability.
The department considered the implications of the proposed amendments to the regulated entities and
the implementing agency and deemed that none of the rule revisions have potentially significant
economic impacts.
(c) A description of the methods that the agency may use to reduce the impact on small businesses.
(i) Establishing less costly compliance requirements in the rulemaking for small businesses.
By correcting and clarifying existing rule provisions and definitions, this rulemaking lessens or
eases the regulatory burden for small businesses.
(ii) Establishing less costly schedules or less stringent deadlines for compliance in the
rulemaking.
This rulemaking corrects or clarifies existing rule provisions and definitions to reduce confusion
and improve understanding and readability.
(iii) Exempting small businesses from any or all requirements of the rulemaking.
This rulemaking corrects or clarifies existing rule provisions and definitions to reduce confusion
and improve understanding and readability.
(d) The probable cost and benefit to private persons and consumers who are directly affected by the
rulemaking.
This rulemaking does not impose any new compliance burdens on regulated entities that are permitted
or introduce additional regulatory requirements and will not impose increased monetary or regulatory
costs on any permitted business, persons, or individuals so regulated. As such, there are no costs to
pass through to consumers, which means there are no impacts on consumers.
A statement of the probable effect on state revenues.
The rule revisions will not impose increased monetary or regulatory costs on other state agencies, political
subdivisions of this state, persons, or individuals so regulated. Without costs to pass through to customers,
there is no projected change in consumer purchase patterns and, thus, no impact on state revenues from
sales taxes.
A description of any less intrusive or less costly alternative methods of achieving the purpose of the
rulemaking.
This rulemaking corrects or clarifies existing rule provisions and definitions to reduce confusion and
improve understanding and readability.
11. Name and address of department personnel with whom persons may communicate regarding the
accuracy of the economic, small business, and consumer impact:
Name: Cheri Dale or Hether Krause
Maricopa County Air Quality Department
Planning and Analysis Division
Address: 1001 N Central Avenue, Suite 125
Phoenix, AZ 85004
Telephone: (602) 506-6010
Fax: (602) 506-6179
E-mail: aqplanning@mail.maricopa.gov
12. Description of the changes between the proposed rule, including supplemental notices and final rule:

Since the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking was published on May 13, 2016 (22 A.A.R 1242), the
department is proposing the following additional amendments:
●Deleted the term “vessel” or “delivery vessel” and replaced with the words “gasoline cargo tank” to
maintain consistency throughout rule. The following sections were revised:
o Section 103.3
o Section 208
o Section 211
o Section 301.2.b(2)
o Section 401.2
o Section 501.1(b)
o Section 502
o Section 505.5(a) and (b)
o Section 506.6
●Changed “solely in another state” to “outside of Arizona” in Section 103.2(b)(1)
●Re-structured Section 103.4(a)(1) to delete “when” at the end of the introductory statement, to add
“when” to the beginning of Section 103.4(a)(1)(a) and to change Section 103.4(a)(1)(b) from “A gasoline
cargo tank has stopped” to “After a gasoline cargo tank has come to a complete stop”
●Deleted the term “tanks” from Section 215.1
●Deleted Section 215.3 (Definition of “Submerged Fill”) text regarding API Standard 650 Compliant,
because such provision is applicable to organic liquids not gasoline.
●Changed the text in Section 302.3(i) to be consistent with the text in Section 302.2(e) regarding capturing
and collecting spilled gasoline
●Added new Section 302.3(j) to be consistent with the text in Section 302.4(b) regarding the conditions
under which a stationary gasoline storage tank shall be loaded with gasoline
●Changed the text in Section 302.4(a) to be consistent with the text in Section 302.2(a) regarding
verifying and maintaining the gasoline cargo tank integrity
●Changed the title of the application for a Maricopa County Vapor Tightness Certification decal.
●Deleted the phrase “or a designee of the Control Officer,” in Section 502.1
●Added “the gasoline cargo tank unit number” to Section 502.2(a) regarding information that must be
included in the “Maricopa County Vapor Tightness Certification Decal Application”
●Included text in Sections 504 and 505 that allows for the use of alternative test methods to determine
compliance with the rule and that allows test methods as approved by the Administrator to be used and
clarified the provision regarding when more than one test method is permitted for a compliance
determination.
●Deleted Section 504.3 (Test Methods-Test Of Internal Vapor Valves) because requirements are in
Sections 504.1 (Compliance-Pressure And Vacuum Tests) and 504.2 (Compliance-Test Of Internal
Vapor Valves)
●Deleted Section 504.4 (Test Methods-Delivery Vessel Vapor Tightness Test) because requirements are in
Section 503.1 (Monitoring For Leaks-Combustible Gas Detector Or An Organic Vapor Analyzer)
13. Summary of the comments made regarding the rule and the department response to them:
No comments were received during the comment period. Return to list of attachments
14. Any other matters prescribed by the statute that are applicable to the specific department or to any
specific rule or class of rules:
Not applicable
15. Incorporations by reference and their location in the rule:

The following test methods are incorporated by reference in Rule 352, Section 505:
 Optical Gas Imaging: Alternative Work Practice for Monitoring Equipment Leaks, 40 CFR 60.18(g)
 EPA Method 21 - Determination of Volatile Organic Compound Leaks
 EPA Method 27 - Determination of Vapor Tightness of Gasoline Delivery Tank Using Pressure
Vacuum Test
 ASTM D323-15a “Standard Test Method for Vapor Pressure of Petroleum Products (Reid Method)
16. Was this rule previously an emergency rule?
No
17. Full text of the rule follows: Return to list of attachments
MARICOPA COUNTY
AIR POLLUTION CONTROL REGULATIONS
REGULATION III – CONTROL OF AIR CONTAMINANTS
RULE 352
GASOLINE DELIVERY VESSEL CARGO TANK TESTING AND USE
INDEX
SECTION 100 – GENERAL
101 PURPOSE
102 APPLICABILITY
103 PARTIAL EXEMPTIONS
SECTION 200 – DEFINITIONS
201 2-POINT SYSTEM
201 AVIATION GASOLINE
202 BULK GASOLINE PLANT
203 BULK GASOLINE TERMINAL
204 COAXIAL VAPOR BALANCE SYSTEM
205 DUAL-POINT VAPOR BALANCE SYSTEM
202 206 EXCESS GASOLINE DRAINAGE
203 207 GASOLINE
204 GASOLINE DELIVERY VESSEL
208 GASOLINE CARGO TANK
209 GASOLINE DISPENSING FACILITY (GDF)
205 210 GASOLINE VAPORS
206 211 LEAK FREE
207 212 MARICOPA COUNTY (MC) PRESSURE VAPOR TIGHTNESS TEST
208 213 PURGING
209 214 STAGE 1 VAPOR RECOVERY SYSTEM (VR SYSTEM)
215 SUBMERGED FILL

210 216 SWITCH LOADING
211 217 VAPOR TIGHT
SECTION 300 – STANDARDS
301 PREVENT LEAKS AND SPILLS
302 GASOLINE DELIVERY VESSEL LEAK TEST REQUIRED
303 DISPLAY A VALID DECAL
304 PURGING PROHIBITED
305 EXEMPTIONS
301 GASOLINE CARGO TANK REQUIREMENTS
302 LOADING OF GASOLINE
SECTION 400 – ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS
401 MARICOPA COUNTY (MC) VAPOR TIGHTNESS TESTING TEST
402 TIME FRAME FOR INSTALLATION OF CONTROL DEVICE
SECTION 500 – RECORDS AND MONITORING
501 MARICOPA COUNTY (MC) GASOLINE CARGO TANK VAPOR TIGHTNESS TESTING
REQUIREMENTS
501 502 RECORDKEEPING AND REPORTING REQUIREMENTS
502 503 MONITORING FOR LEAKS
503 504 COMPLIANCE DETERMINATION
504 505 TEST MZETHODS METHODS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE
Revised 07/13/88
Revised 11/16/92
Revised 05/05/99
Revised 09/25/13
Revised 07/13/1988; Revised 11/16/1992; Revised 05/05/1999; Revised 09/25/2013; and Revised MM/DD/YYYY
MARICOPA COUNTY
AIR POLLUTION CONTROL REGULATIONS
REGULATION III – CONTROL OF AIR CONTAMINANTS
RULE 352
GASOLINE DELIVERY VESSEL CARGO TANK TESTING AND USE
SECTION 100 – GENERAL
101 PURPOSE: To limit emissions of volatile organic compounds (VOC) from gasoline delivery vessels cargo
tanks.
102 APPLICABILITY: This rule applies to any gasoline delivery vessel cargo tank which is used to receive or
deliver load gasoline within Maricopa County, and to all persons who own, operate, maintain, repair, or test
such a vessel gasoline cargo tank.
103 PARTIAL EXEMPTIONS:
103.1 This rule does not apply to a gasoline cargo tank when loading the following fuels:

a. Aviation gasoline loaded at airports.
b. Diesel.
c. Liquefied petroleum gas (LPG).
103.2 A gasoline cargo tank is exempt from the Maricopa County (MC) Vapor Tightness Test
requirements of Section 301 of this rule, if the gasoline cargo tank meets the requirements in
Sections 103.1(a), (b), or (c) of this rule.
a. A gasoline cargo tank is exempt from the MC Vapor Tightness Test requirements of Section
301 of this rule, if the gasoline cargo tank meets all of the following conditions:
(1) The gasoline cargo tank was placed in operation before July 13, 1988; and
(2) The gasoline cargo tank transported gasoline within Maricopa County before January 1,
1998; and
(3) The gasoline cargo tank never loads at a gasoline terminal; and
(4) The gasoline cargo tank serves only farm tanks or those non-resale gasoline dispensing
operations having a yearly throughput not exceeding 120,000 gallons of gasoline, verified
by monthly records pursuant to Section 500 of this rule; and
(5) The owner or operator of the gasoline cargo tank submits a signed affidavit to the Control
Officer documenting compliance with Sections 103.1(a) through 103.1(c)of this rule; and
(6) The owner or operator has a complete copy of the signed affidavit available in the
gasoline cargo tank for inspection by a bulk gasoline plant operator or the Control
Officer. Maricopa County will not issue a decal to any gasoline cargo tank claiming this
exemption.
b. A gasoline cargo tank is exempt from the MC Vapor Tightness Test requirements of Section
301 of this rule, if at least one of the following conditions is met:
(1) The gasoline load originated solely outside of Arizona.
(2) The gasoline load originated within Maricopa County but is not delivered within
Maricopa County.
c. A gasoline cargo tank is exempt from the MC Vapor Tightness Test requirements of Section
301 of this rule, if the owner or operator of a gasoline cargo tank provides documentation
from another agency that attests to the vapor integrity of the gasoline cargo tank and complies
with Section 401.2 of this rule.
103.3 An owner or operator of a gasoline cargo tank exempted by Section 103.2(a) of this rule is allowed
to incidentally purge gasoline vapors from the gasoline cargo tank as a passive result of loading, or
briefly when lids or ports must be open for inspection.
103.4 Opening Hatches On Gasoline Cargo Tanks:
a. Owners or operators, their contractors, and authorized government agents may open vapor
containment equipment on a gasoline cargo tank while performing operations required by
governmental agencies, but shall be restricted as follows, unless approved in advance by the
Control Officer:
(1) Wait at least 3 minutes before opening its hatch or other vapor seal on a gasoline cargo
tank:
(a) When loading of gasoline is complete.
(b) After a gasoline cargo tank has come to a complete stop.
(2) Reclose hatch or other sealing device within 3 minutes of completing the required
procedures.

(3) Limit wind speed at opened hatch or other opened sealing device to not more than 3 mph
(1.34 m/sec), using a barrier if necessary.
b. Loading: Hatches of a gasoline cargo tank may be open for monitoring to prevent overflow
during the period that the gasoline cargo tank is loading gasoline from a tank or other source,
if so required by a local fire code or other ordinance.
c. Connecting Coaxial Fittings: Requirements for first connecting a vapor recovery hose
before a gasoline cargo tank loading hose do not apply to coaxial vapor recovery connection
fittings.
SECTION 200 – DEFINITIONS: For the purpose of this rule, the following definitions shall apply, in addition to
those definitions found in Rule 100 (General Provisions and Definitions) of these rules. In the event of any
inconsistency between any of the Maricopa County air pollution control rules, the definitions in this rule take
precedence.
201 2-POINT SYSTEM: A fill pipe and a vapor-recovery pipe pair which are in close proximity to one another
and are connected directly to and emerge directly above the tank they serve.
201 AVIATION GASOLINE (AVGAS): A type of gasoline used to fuel a piston engine aircraft.
202 BULK GASOLINE PLANT: Any gasoline storage and distribution facility that meets all of the
following:
202.1 Loads gasoline from a pipeline, rail, or gasoline cargo tank into a stationary storage tank;
202.2 Loads gasoline from the stationary storage tank into gasoline cargo tanks for transport to gasoline
dispensing facilities; and
202.3 Has a gasoline throughput of less than 20,000 gallons per day. Gasoline throughput shall be the
maximum calculated design throughput which may be limited by compliance with an enforceable
condition under Federal, State, or local law, and discoverable by the Control Officer.
203 BULK GASOLINE TERMINAL: Any gasoline storage and loading facility that meets all of the following:
203.1 Loads gasoline from a pipeline, rail, or gasoline cargo tank into a stationary storage tank;
203.2 Loads gasoline from the stationary storage tank into gasoline cargo tanks for transport to gasoline
dispensing facilities; and
203.3 Has a gasoline throughput of 20,000 gallons per day or greater. Gasoline throughput shall be the
maximum calculated design throughput which may be limited by compliance with an enforceable
condition under Federal, State, or local law, and discoverable by the Administrator and any other
person.
204 COAXIAL VAPOR BALANCE SYSTEM: A type of vapor balance system in which the gasoline vapors
are removed through the same fill pipe connection as which the fuel is delivered.
205 DUAL-POINT VAPOR BALANCE SYSTEM: A type of vapor balance system in which the storage tank
is equipped with an entry port for a gasoline fill pipe and a separate exit port for a vapor connection.
202 206 EXCESS GASOLINE DRAINAGE: More than 10 milliliters (2 teaspoonsful) of liquid gasoline lost from
the end of a loading hose or vapor hose in the process of connecting or disconnecting a
gasoline delivery loading hose,; or any quantity of gasoline lost during those processes escaping out the end
of such a hose that wets any area(s) on the ground having an aggregate area greater than 113 square inches,
or the perimeter of which would encompass a circle of 12 inches (30.5 cm) diameter. This does not include
drainage into a fill pipe’s spill containment receptacle.
203 207 GASOLINE: Any petroleum distillate, petroleum distillate/alcohol blend, petroleum distillate/organic
compound blend, or alcohol having or blend of petroleum distillate with other combustible liquid(s), such
as alcohol, that is used as a fuel for internal combustion engines and has a Reid vapor pressure between 4.0
and 14.7 psi (200–760 mm Hg.) as determined by Section 505 of this rule, and which is used as a fuel for
internal combustion engines. For the purposes of this rule, liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) is excluded.

204 GASOLINE DELIVERY VESSEL: Any vehicular-mounted container such as a tanker truck, tank trailer,
cargo tank or any other wheel-mounted container used to transport gasoline. This includes any hoses the
vessel carries through which deliveries must be made.
208 GASOLINE CARGO TANK: A delivery tank truck or railcar which is loading or unloading gasoline, or
which has loaded or unloaded gasoline on the immediately previous load. This includes any hoses the
gasoline cargo tank carries through which deliveries must be made.
209 GASOLINE DISPENSING FACILITY: Any stationary facility which dispenses gasoline into the fuel
tank of a motor vehicle, motor vehicle engine, nonroad vehicle, or nonroad engine, including a nonroad
vehicle or nonroad engine used solely for competition. These facilities include, but are not limited to,
facilities that dispense gasoline into on- and off-road, street, or highway motor vehicles, lawn equipment,
boats, test engines, landscaping equipment, generators, pumps, and other gasoline fueled engines and
equipment.
205 210 GASOLINE VAPORS: Vapors, originating from liquid gasoline, that are usually found in mixture with
air. Included are any droplets of liquid gasoline or of gasoline-vapor condensate that are entrained by the
vapor.
206 211 LEAK FREE: Having no single liquid gasoline leak of more than 3 drops per minute from a
gasoline delivery vessel cargo tank, including fill hose(s) and vapor hose(s), but not including the
disconnecting or connecting of either a gasoline hose from a gasoline fill line or a vapor hose from a vapor
line.
207 212 MARICOPA COUNTY (MC) PRESSURE VAPOR TIGHTNESS TEST: The complete pressure,
vacuum, and vapor-valve testing of a gasoline delivery vessel cargo tank that is performed according to
Maricopa County specifications as described in subsection 302.2 Section 501 of this rule.
208 213 PURGING: Removing, cleaning, or scouring out gasoline vapors from all or a portion of a delivery
vessel gasoline cargo tank by active or passive means and emitting the vapors into the atmosphere.
209 214 STAGE 1 VAPOR RECOVERY SYSTEM (VR SYSTEM): Any piping, hoses, equipment, and/or
devices which are used to collect, store, or process gasoline vapors displaced by the delivery loading of
gasoline and also by the onloading of gasoline into a vapor laden delivery vessel gasoline cargo tank.
215 SUBMERGED FILL: Any discharge pipe or nozzle which meets the applicable specification as follows:
215.1 Top-Fill or Bottom-Fill: The end of the discharge pipe or nozzle is totally submerged when the
liquid level is six inches (15 cm) from the bottom of the tank.
215.2 Side-Fill: At its highest point within the storage tank less 2,000,000 gallon capacity, the end of the
discharge pipe or nozzle is totally submerged when the liquid level is 18 inches (46 cm) from the
bottom of the tank.

Submerged Fill Diagram
NOT TO SCALE
Top Fill Opening
6” Maximum
Height from bottom
of the tank
Side Fill
Maximum 18” from
bottom of the tank
Bottom Fill
Minimum 6”
of liquid
210 216 SWITCH LOADING: Loading diesel fuel into a delivery vessel gasoline cargo tank whose previous load
was gasoline; or loading any liquid not subject to this rule into a delivery vessel gasoline cargo tank whose
previous load was gasoline.
211 217 VAPOR TIGHT: A condition in which a suitable detector at the site of (potential) leakage of vapor shows
less than 10,000 ppmv when calibrated with methane or the detector shows less than 1/5 LEL (lower
explosive limit) subsequent to calibration lower explosive limit (LEL) when calibrated with a gas specified
by the manufacturer and is used according to the manufacturer’s instructions.
SECTION 300 – STANDARDS
301 PREVENT LEAKS AND SPILLS:
301.1 Vessel Integrity: In Maricopa County, no person shall store or transport gasoline in or otherwise
use or operate any gasoline delivery vessel unless such vessel is designed and maintained to be
vapor tight and leak free.
301.2 Onloading Measures:
a. At any bulk loading rack, connect a vapor return hose before connecting any loading hose.
b. At a bulk plant, connect an additional vapor hose before connecting any additional loading
hose, unless an assisted vapor return system is serving the vapor hose that is already
connected.
c. Use a bucket or other effective capture device to catch any liquid dripping during the
connection or disconnection of both the loading hose from the truck and the vapor hose from
the loading dock’s vapor receiving pipe.
(1) Either dispose of the captured liquid in a tank designated for that purpose, or use a
receptacle or a material designed to absorb the liquid.
(2) Any gasoline that escapes or spills must be collected and contained.
301.3 Prevent Spills and Excess Drainage: A driver/operator of a gasoline delivery vessel shall:
a. Thoroughly drain a fill hose and a vapor recovery hose into the dispensing tank before
disconnecting it from the tank’s fittings.

b. Connect and disconnect fill hoses and vapor recovery hoses in such a way as to prevent
excess gasoline drainage (more than 2 teaspoonsful) from escaping from the hose in one
connect/disconnect cycle.
c. Spills and any gasoline that is deposited in or on an area other than within the dispensing tank
shall be collected and contained. This can include, but is not limited to, the correct use of
buckets and/or absorbent material designed for the purpose, and the correct disposal of the
collected gasoline.
301.4 Vapor Hose use Required at Retail Gas Stations:
a. A driver/operator shall not deliver gasoline to a dispensing tank at a retail gas station unless a
vapor hose is first connected from the vessel to a vapor return-line serving the tank.
b. No delivery shall be made to a retail tank if:
(1) it is not served by a vapor return, or
(2) if it has a locked cap that cannot be removed, or
(3) if broken fittings prevent correct connection of the vapor hose.
301.5 Prevent Vapor Escape During Deliveries: For gasoline dispensing tanks that are equipped with a
Stage 1 vapor recovery system (VR System):
a. During delivery, the vessel operator shall not remove the lid of a fill tube unless every other
fill tube either has a lid fastened in place or a delivery hose connecting it to the delivery
vessel.
b. Connect a vapor recovery hose before connecting any gasoline delivery hose.
c. Disconnect a delivery hose from a tank before disconnecting the vapor recovery hose.
d. Restriction on Multiple Connection: A delivery vessel shall not simultaneously have more
than one gasoline delivery hose connected, unless each delivery hose is connected to a
dispensing tank’s 2-point system that already has a vapor hose connecting it to the vessel.
301.6 Vapor Recovery Systems Having Remote Vapor Return Lines: If a delivery vessel’s vapor hose is
connected to a vapor return line that is not part of a 2-point system, then there shall not be more
than one gasoline delivery hose connected to the vessel, and no other hoses connected to a fill
tube; viz., no more than one compartment of the delivery vessel shall be emptied at a time.
302 GASOLINE DELIVERY VESSEL LEAK TEST REQUIRED: A gasoline delivery vessel shall first pass
the MC Pressure Test before delivering or onloading gasoline within Maricopa County, and to continue,
must pass the MC Pressure Test each year thereafter. This does not apply to loads that originate solely in
another state, nor to loads originating in Maricopa County that are not delivered in Maricopa County.
302.1 Testing: The MC Pressure Test shall be performed according to subsection 302.2.
a. Scheduling and notification of an initial test or annual retest shall be done in accordance with
subsection 401.1 and subsection 401.3.
b. A tester shall record the results of a Pressure Test according to the format in subsection 501.2.
c. A valid Maricopa County Air Quality Department decal shall be affixed to the vessel
consequent to passing the MC Pressure Test before the vessel may deliver or onload gasoline.
d. An owner or operator of a delivery vessel shall comply with subsection 401.2 registration
requirements to obtain a valid Maricopa County Air Quality Department decal after a
successful MC Pressure Test.
302.2 MC Pressure Test: A vessel that is being MC Pressure Tested shall pass all 3 of the following
pressure subtests, in the following order, and use the same vapor hose during the test as will be
used for deliveries by that same unit:

a. Positive Pressure Subtest: Lose no more than 1.0 inch (25.4 mm) of water column in 5.0
minutes, when pressurized to a gauge pressure of 18 inches (45.7 cm) of water in 2
consecutive runs according to procedures in subsections 5.1.1 through 5.2.7 of EPA Method
27, as incorporated by reference in Section 504 of this rule; and
b. Vapor Valve Subtest: Lose no more than 5.0 inches (127 mm) of water column in 5.0
minutes, measured in the vapor system after the vessel compartments are first collectively
pressurized to a gauge pressure of 18 inches (45.7 cm) of water and then the vapor valves are
closed, per subsection 503.2 of this Rule 352; and
c. Partial Vacuum Subtest: Gain no more than 1.0 inch (25.4 mm) of water column in 5.0
minutes, when initially evacuated to a gauge pressure of 6 inches (15.2 cm) of water, in 2
consecutive runs, per subsections 5.3.1 through 5.3.7 of EPA Method 27, as incorporated by
reference in Section 504 of this rule.
d. Pressure Instability: A subtest is invalidated if during either of the pressure subtests, more
than 1/2 inch water pressure is gained, or if during the vacuum test the vacuum is increased by
more than minus ½ inch.
302.3 A vessel shall be repaired, retested, and pass all 3 subtests in the same testing period within 15
days of testing if it does not pass all 3 subtests of subsection 302.2 of this rule.
303 DISPLAY A VALID DECAL: Each gasoline delivery vessel shall clearly display a valid Maricopa County
Air Quality Department decal that is permanently mounted near the front on the right (passenger) side of
the vessel.
304 PURGING PROHIBITED:
304.1 No person shall purge gasoline vapors into the atmosphere from a delivery vessel unless the
following conditions are met:
a. VOC emissions shall be reduced at least 90% by weight, including capture and processing, by
a control device having a Maricopa County Air Pollution Permit; and
b. Such purging shall be done only after all delivery valves are opened and any liquid gasoline
outflow is captured in a container having an attached lid which is kept closed when not
receiving or pouring gasoline.
304.2 An operator of a delivery vessel shall not purge gasoline vapors from such vessel as a passive
result of switch loading, except for vessels exempted by subsection 305.1.
305 EXEMPTIONS:
305.1 A delivery vessel is exempt from pressure test requirements of Section 302 if all of the following
conditions are met:
a. The vessel was placed in operation before July 13, 1988; and
b. The vessel transported gasoline within Maricopa County before January 1, 1998; and
c. The vessel never loads at a gasoline terminal; and
d. The vessel serves only farm tanks and/or those non-resale dispensing operations having a
yearly throughput not exceeding 120,000 gallons of gasoline, verified by monthly records
pursuant to subsection 501.1a; and
e. The vessel either has a sticker affixed to it that indicates to a bulk plant operator that the
vessel may be loaded in Maricopa County, or has an affidavit signed by an owner or officer of
the operating company filed with the Maricopa County Air Quality Department, with a
complete copy of the signed affidavit available in the vehicle for inspection by a bulk plant
operator or the Control Officer.

305.2 An operator of a delivery vessel exempted by subsection 305.1 is allowed to incidentally purge
gasoline vapors from such vessel as a passive result of loading, or briefly when lids/ports must be
open for inspection.
305.3 Opening Hatches on Non-Exempt Vessels:
a. Required by Rule: Owners/operators, their contractors, and authorized government agents
may open vapor containment equipment on a nonexempt gasoline delivery vessel while
performing operations required by governmental agencies, but shall be restricted as follows,
unless approved in advance by the Control Officer:
(1) Wait at least 3 minutes after onloading is complete and after a delivery vessel has stopped
before opening its hatch or other vapor seal.
(2) Reclose hatch or other sealing device within 3 minutes of completing the required
procedures.
(3) Limit windspeed at opened hatch or other opened sealing device to not more than 3 mph
(1.34 m/sec), using a barrier if necessary.
b. Defueling: Hatches of a delivery vessel may be open for monitoring to prevent overflow
during the period that the vessel is receiving gasoline from a tank or other source, if so
required by a local fire code or other ordinance.
c. Connecting Coaxial Fittings: Requirements for first connecting a vapor hose before a gasoline
delivery hose do not apply to coaxial VR connection fittings.
301 GASOLINE CARGO TANK REQUIREMENTS:
301.1 Gasoline Cargo Tank Integrity: In Maricopa County, an owner or operator of a gasoline cargo
tank shall not store or transport gasoline in or otherwise use or operate any gasoline cargo tank
unless:
a. The gasoline cargo tank is designed and maintained to be vapor tight and leak free.
b. The gasoline cargo tank passes the MC Vapor Tightness Test unless exempted by Section 103
of this rule.
c. A valid, permanently mounted Marcicopa County Vapor Tightness Certification decal is
clearly displayed near the front right (passenger) side of the gasoline cargo tank, if not
exempted by Section 103 of this rule.
301.2 MC Vapor Tightness Test: A gasoline cargo tank shall pass the MC Vapor Tightness Test before
loading gasoline within Maricopa County, unless exempted by Section 103 of this rule.
a. Testing: The MC Vapor Tightness Test shall be performed according to Section 501 of this
rule.
(1) Scheduling and notification of a gasoline cargo tank MC Vapor Tightness Test shall be
done in accordance with Section 401.1 of this rule.
(2) A tester shall record the results of the MC Vapor Tightness Test according to Section
502.2 of this rule.
(3) If a gasoline cargo tank does not pass all three (3) subtests of the MC Vapor Tightness
Test as listed in Section 502.2 of this rule, the gasoline cargo tank shall be repaired,
retested, and pass all 3 subtests in the same testing period within 15 days of initial testing.
b. Maricopoa County Vapor Tightness Certification Decal: An owner or operator of a
gasoline cargo tank shall:
(1) Comply with Sections 401.1 and 401.2 of this rule for notification and registration
requirements to obtain a valid Maricopa County Vapor Tightness Certification decal after
passing the MC Vapor Tightness Test; and

(2) Each gasoline cargo tank shall clearly display a valid Maricopa County Vapor Tightness
Certification decal that is permanently mounted near the front on the right (passenger)
side of the gasoline cargo tank, unless exempted by Section 103 of this rule.
301.3 Purging:
a. An owner or operator is allowed to purge gasoline vapors from a gasoline cargo tank if the
following conditions are met:
(1) VOC emissions shall be reduced at least 90% by weight, including capture and
processing, by a control device having a Maricopa County Air Pollution Permit; and
(2) Such purging shall be done only after all loading valves are opened and any liquid
gasoline outflow is captured in a container having an attached lid which is kept closed
when not receiving or pouring gasoline.
b. An owner or operator of a gasoline cargo tank shall not purge gasoline vapors from such tank
as a passive result of switch loading, except for gasoline cargo tanks exempted by Section
103 of this rule.
302 LOADING OF GASOLINE:
302.1 Loading of Gasoline into a Gasoline Cargo Tank from a Bulk Plant: An owner or operator of
a gasoline cargo tank shall only load gasoline at a bulk gasoline plant loading rack when the
following conditions are met:
a. The gasoline cargo tank integrity is maintained and verified by:
(1) The display of a Maricopa County Vapor Tightness Certification decal on the gasoline
cargo tank; or
(2) An affidavit per Section 103.2(a)(6) of this rule is readily available.
b. A vapor recovery hose shall be connected prior to the connection of any gasoline loading hose
at any bulk loading rack.
c. Connect an additional vapor recovery hose before connecting any additional gasoline loading
hose, unless an assisted vapor recovery system is serving the vapor hose that is already
connected.
d. Disconnect loading hoses and vapor recovery hoses in such a way as to prevent excess
gasoline drainage (more than 2 teaspoonsful) from escaping from the hose in one
connect/disconnect cycle.
e. Use a bucket or other effective capture device to catch any gasoline dripping during the
connection or disconnection of both the gasoline loading hose from the gasoline cargo tank
and the vapor hose from the loading dock’s vapor receiving pipe.
(1) Spills and any gasoline that is deposited in or on an area other than within the gasoline
cargo tank shall be collected and contained. This can include, but is not limited to, the
correct use of buckets and/or absorbent material designed for the purpose and the correct
disposal of the collected gasoline.
(2) Any gasoline that escapes, spills, or leaks must be collected and contained in a manner
that will prevent evaporation into the atmosphere.
302.2 Loading of Gasoline at a Bulk Terminal: An owner or operator of a gasoline cargo tank shall
only load gasoline at a gasoline bulk terminal when the following conditions are met:
a. The gasoline cargo tank integrity shall be maintained and verified by the display of a
Maricopa County Vapor Tightness Certification decal on the gasoline cargo tank.
b. A vapor recovery hose shall be connected prior to the connection of any gasoline loading hose
at any bulk loading rack.

c. Connect an additional vapor recovery hose before connecting any additional gasoline loading
hose, unless an assisted vapor return system is serving the vapor hose that is already
connected.
d. Disconnect loading hoses and vapor recovery hoses in such a way as to prevent excess
gasoline drainage (more than 2 teaspoonsful) from escaping from the hose in one
connect/disconnect cycle.
e. Use a bucket or other effective capture device to catch any gasoline dripping during the
connection or disconnection of both the gasoline loading hose from the gasoline cargo tank
and the vapor hose from the loading dock’s vapor receiving pipe.
(1) Spills and any gasoline that is deposited in or on an area other than within the gasoline
cargo tank shall be collected and contained. This can include, but is not limited to, the
correct use of buckets and/or absorbent material designed for the purpose and the correct
disposal of the collected gasoline.
(2) Any gasoline that escapes, spills, or leaks must be collected and contained in a manner
that will prevent evaporation into the atmosphere.
302.3 Loading of Gasoline into a Stationary Gasoline Storage Tank at a Non-Retail Gasoline
Dispensing Facility: An owner or operator of a gasoline cargo tank shall only load gasoline at a
non-retail gasoline dispensing facility when the following conditions are met:
a. The gasoline cargo tank integrity is maintained and verified by:
(1) The display of a Maricopa County Vapor Tightness Certification decal on the gasoline
cargo tank; or
(2) An affidavit per Section 103.2(a)(6) of this rule is readily available.
b. A vapor recovery hose shall be connected prior to the connection of any gasoline loading hose
if the stationary gasoline storage tank is configured to include a vapor return connection.
c. Vapor Recovery Systems Having Remote Vapor Return Lines: If a gasoline cargo tank’s
vapor recovery hose is connected to a vapor return line that is not part of a dual-point vapor
balance system, then there shall not be more than one gasoline loading hose connected to the
gasoline cargo tank, and no additional hoses connected to a fill pipe.
d. An owner or operator shall not remove the lid of a fill pipe unless every other fill pipe either
has a lid fastened in place or a loading hose connecting it to the gasoline cargo tank.
e. A portable fill pipe shall be used to load gasoline into any stationary gasoline storage tank that
is not equipped with a permanent submerged fill pipe.
f. Restriction on Multiple Connections: A gasoline cargo tank shall not simultaneously have
more than one gasoline loading hose connected, unless each loading hose is connected to a
gasoline cargo tank’s dual-point vapor balance system that already has a vapor recovery hose
connecting it to the gasoline cargo tank.
g. A loading hose and a vapor recovery hose shall be thoroughly drained into the gasoline cargo
tank before disconnecting the gasoline cargo tank from the gasoline cargo tank’s fittings.
h. The loading hoses and vapor recovery hoses shall be disconnected in such a way as to prevent
excess gasoline drainage (more than 2 teaspoonsful) from escaping from the hose in one
connect/disconnect cycle.
i. A bucket or other effective capture device shall be used to catch any gasoline dripping during
the connection or disconnection of both the gasoline loading hose from the gasoline cargo
tank and the vapor hose from the loading dock’s vapor receiving pipe.
(1) Spills and any gasoline that is deposited in or on an area other than within the gasoline
cargo tank shall be collected and contained. This can include, but is not limited to, the

correct use of buckets and/or absorbent material designed for the purpose and the correct
disposal of the collected gasoline.
(2) Any gasoline that escapes, spills, or leaks must be collected and contained in a manner
that will prevent evaporation into the atmosphere.
j. An owner or operator of a gasoline cargo tank shall only load gasoline into a stationary
gasoline storage tank when:
(1) The stationary gasoline storage tank is equipped with a vapor return poppetted valve.
(2) Any locked cap can be removed.
(3) The stationary gasoline storage tank does not have any broken or damaged fitting that
prevent the correct connection of a loading hose or a vapor hose.
302.4 Loading of Gasoline into a Stationary Gasoline Storage Tank at a Retail Gasoline Dispensing
Facility: An owner or operator of a gasoline cargo tank shall only load gasoline at a retail gasoline
dispensing facility when the following conditions are met:
a. The gasoline cargo tank integrity shall be maintained and verified by the display of a
Maricopa County Vapor Tightness Certification decal on the gasoline cargo tank.
b. An owner or operator of a gasoline cargo tank shall only load gasoline into a stationary
gasoline storage tank when:
(1) The stationary gasoline storage tank is equipped with a vapor return poppetted valve.
(2) Any locked cap can be removed.
(3) The stationary gasoline storage tank does not have any broken or damaged fitting that
prevent the correct connection of a loading hose or a vapor hose.
c. An owner or operator shall not load gasoline to a stationary gasoline storage tank at a retail
gasoline dispensing facility unless a vapor hose is first connected from the gasoline cargo tank
to a vapor return-line serving the stationary gasoline storage tank.
d. Vapor Recovery Systems Having Remote Vapor Return Lines: If a gasoline cargo tank’s
vapor hose is connected to a vapor return line that is not part of a dual-point vapor balance
system, then there shall not be more than one gasoline delivery hose connected to the gasoline
cargo tank, and no additional hoses connected to a fill tube.
e. An owner or operator shall not remove the lid of a fill tube unless every other fill tube either
has a lid fastened in place or a delivery hose connecting it to the gasoline cargo tank.
f. Restriction on Multiple Connection: A gasoline cargo tank shall not simultaneously have
more than one gasoline delivery hose connected, unless each delivery hose is connected to a
gasoline cargo tank’s dual-point vapor balance system that already has a vapor hose
connecting it to the gasoline cargo tank.
g. Thoroughly drain a loading hose and a vapor recovery hose into the gasoline cargo tank
before disconnecting it from the gasoline cargo tank’s fittings.
h. Disconnect a loading hose from a stationary gasoline storage tank before disconnecting the
vapor recovery hose.
i. Disconnect Loading hoses and vapor recovery hoses in such a way as to prevent excess
gasoline drainage (more than 2 teaspoonsful) from escaping from the hose in one
connect/disconnect cycle.
j. Spills and any gasoline that are deposited in or on an area other than within the gasoline cargo
tank shall be collected and contained. This can include, but is not limited to, the correct use of
buckets and/or absorbent material designed for the purpose, and the correct disposal of the
collected gasoline.

SECTION 400 – ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS
401 MARICOPA COUNTY (MC) VAPOR TIGHTNESS TESTING TEST: Testing required by subsections
302.2a, b, and c Section 301.2 of this rule, shall be conducted by the owner or operator of the delivery
vessel gasoline cargo tank., or by a consultant, at the expense of the owner or operator. The Control Officer
may at any time observe the tests. An owner or operator shall comply with the following provisions:
401.1 Notification of Required Testing: The owner, operator, or tester shall notify the Control Officer
as follows for each vessel gasoline cargo tank being tested to meet requirements of Section 302 or
subsection 301.2 Section 301.2 of this rule:
a. Contact the Control Officer during normal business hours of the Department at least 4 hours
prior to gasoline cargo tank vapor tightness testing;. and
b. Give Provide an estimated start time that is no more than 1 hour prior to actual gasoline cargo
tank vapor tightness testing start time;.
c. Except for weekend testing, the Control Officer shall be notified no more than 24 hours in
advance of 72 hours prior to gasoline cargo tank vapor tightness testing;.
d. For weekend testing, the notification shall be given, along with the date of testing, prior to 2
PM on Friday (or Thursday, if Friday is a County holiday);.
e. Give the location of the testing;.
f. Any testing that is performed in the 8 hour period between 9 PM and 5 AM is not valid for
purposes of satisfying Section 302 301.2 of this rule requirements, except if the Control
Officer gives specific, advance permission for a particular occasion.
401.2 Registration: To obtain a Maricopa County Vapor Tightness Certification decal, do the
following information shall be submitted to the Control Officer for each vessel gasoline cargo
tank that passes the required annual gasoline cargo tank vapor tightness test:
a. Assemble in 1 packet the following 3 items: (1) A properly A completed “APPLICATION
FOR AIR POLLUTION VAPOR RECOVERY TIGHTNESS
CERTIFICATION MARICOPA COUNTY VAPOR TIGHTNESS CERTIFICATION
DECAL APPLICATION” (also called “The Application” application), and that includes, at a
minimum, all of the following information required by Section 502.2 of this rule.
(2) b. A properly completed copy of the MCESD “Maricopa County Air Quality Department
Gasoline Cargo Tank Vapor Tightness “Tank Truck Leak Certification Check
List” (checklist), and
(3) c. The annual fee remittance. (The fee amount appears as listed in Rule 280.)
b. Send or convey this single packet to the Maricopa County Air Quality Department at the
address on the top of the application.
c. d. Upon receipt of these 3 properly completed items the completed application, checklist and fee
remittance, a Maricopa County Vapor Tightness Certification decal will be issued by the
Control Officer.
401.3 Expiration:
a. A Maricopa County Vapor Tightness Certification decal that is issued to a vessel gasoline
cargo tank that passed its test in the 4-month period between March 1 through June 30 shall
expire at 11:59 PM on June 30 of the following year.
b. A Maricopa County Vapor Tightness Certification decal that is issued to a vessel gasoline
cargo tank that passed its test in the period after June 30 of the previous year and before
March 1 of the current year shall expire at 11:59 PM on June 30 of the following year. For
example, if the test is passed between July 1, 2000, through February 28, 2001, the decal
expires on June 30, 2001.

401.4 Loss Lost, Defaced or Destroyed Maricopa County Vapor Tightness Certification Decal:
a. An owner or operator shall notify the Control Officer immediately if a
valid decal/sticker Maricopa County Vapor Tightness Certification decal is lost, defaced, or
destroyed.
b. The Control Officer may require a demonstration of need for decal replacement.
c. If Rule 280 so provides, the Control Officer may charge a fee for reissue or substitute issue of
a lost, defaced, or destroyed decal/sticker Maricopa County Vapor Tightness Certification
decal, if the Control Officer determines that the Department is not at fault.
402 TIME FRAME FOR INSTALLATION OF CONTROL DEVICE: An owner or operator of
a vessel gasoline cargo tank testing operation who chooses to comply with the Section 304 301.3 of this
rule purging provisions through the use of a control device shall submit by August 1, 1999, an application
for a Maricopa County Air Pollution Control Permit and an Operation and Maintenance Plan for the control
device. The device shall be fully functioning by May 1, 2000.
SECTION 500 – RECORDS AND MONITORING
501 MARICOPA COUNTY (MC) GASOLINE CARGO TANK VAPOR TIGHTNESS TESTING
REQUIREMENT:
501.1 Each gasoline cargo tank shall passes all of the vapor tightness tests in the listed order of Section
501.1 of this rule, using the same vapor hose during each test as will be used for loading. If more
than one vapor recovery hose is used for loading, the sequence of tests shall be performed for each
vapor hose.
a. Pressure Test: Lose no more than 1.0 inch (25.4 mm) of water column in 5.0 minutes, when
pressurized to a gauge pressure of 18 inches (45.7 cm) of water in 2 consecutive runs
according to procedures in subsections 5.1.1 through 5.2.7 of EPA Method 27, as
incorporated by reference in Section 505 of this rule; and
b. Vapor Valve Loss Test: Lose no more than 5.0 inches (127 mm) of water column in 5.0
minutes, measured in the vapor system after the gasoline cargo tank compartments are first
collectively pressurized to a gauge pressure of 18 inches (45.7 cm) of water and then the
vapor valves are closed, per Section 504.2 of this rule; and
c. Vacuum Test: Gain no more than 1.0 inch (25.4 mm) of water column in 5.0 minutes, when
initially evacuated to a gauge pressure of 6 inches (15.2 cm) of water, in 2 consecutive runs,
per subsections 5.3.1 through 5.3.7 of EPA Method 27, as incorporated by reference in
Section 505 of this rule.
d. Pressure Instability: A test is invalidated if during the positive pressure test or the vapor
valve loss test, more than ½ inch water pressure is gained. A test is invalid if during the
vacuum test the vacuum is increased by more than minus ½ inch.
501.2 A gasoline cargo tank shall be repaired, retested, and pass all three (3) subtests in the same testing
period within 15 days of testing if it does not pass all three (3) subtests of Section 501.1 of this
rule.
501 502 RECORDKEEPING AND REPORTING REQUIREMENTS:
501.1 502.1 The owner or operator of a gasoline delivery vessel cargo tank subject to this rule shall maintain
records of all certification, testing, and repairs.
a. Such records must be maintained in a legible, readily available condition for at least 5 years
after the date the testing and repair is completed.
b. Upon verbal or written request by the Control Officer, or a designee of the Control Officer,
records shall be provided within a reasonable time. If the Control Officer is at the site where
requested records are kept, records shall be provided without delay.

501.2 502.2 The records of the gasoline cargo tank vapor tightness certification testing required by
Section 302 301.2 of this rule, must be recorded in both of the following documents: the
“Application for Air Pollution Vapor Recovery Certification” “Maricopa County Vapor Tightness
Certification Decal Application” and the “Maricopa County Air Quality Department Gasoline
Cargo Tank Vapor Tightness “Tank Truck Leak Certification Check List”. Pressure and vacuum
shall be recorded to no less than the nearest quarter inch or half-centimeter of water column. The
minimum requirements for each of these 2 documents follow:
a. For the “Application for Air Pollution Vapor Recovery Certification” “Maricopa County
Vapor Tightness Certification Decal Application”:
(1) Owner's name and address.
(2) Tank ID number, the location of the test, the time of the test, and the date of the test. The
manufacturer’s Tank ID gasoline cargo tank serial number,.
(3) The gasoline cargo tank unit number.
(4) The location of the test.
(5) The time of the test.
(6) The date of the test.
(3) (7) For the pressure subtest test, 2 two (2) readings: the change in pressure (in inches H2O of
water) for Run 1 and the change in pressure for Run 2.
(4) (8) For the vapor-valve loss test subtest (subsection 302.2b), 1 one (1) reading: the total
change in pressure during the test.
(5) (9) For the vacuum test, 2 two (2) readings: the total change in vacuum during Run 1 and the
same for Run 2.
(10) The signature of the person conducting the vapor tightness test.
b. The “Maricopa County Air Quality Department Gasoline Cargo Tank Vapor Tightness “Tank
Truck Leak Certification Check List” (or its successor document) shall contain at least the
following information:
(1) The same information required in subsections a(1) and a(2) of this subsection 501.2; and
(2) The time the subtest began, the initial pressure of the subtest, the finish time, the final
pressure of the subtest, and the pressure change between the start and end of the subtest;
the vessel’s unit number, manufacturer’s serial number, the tank capacity, whether the
tank was purged of gasoline vapors, and the date of the next leakage test if the set of 3
subtests are not all passed.
(3) If the initial pressure test was not passed, one set of readings in the row “Initial Test”,
also giving the elapsed time if the pressure reached zero before 5 minutes. For example,
the row marked “Initial Test” will normally contain the results of the initial failed subtest
if any repairs were made subsequent to any pressurization or evacuation of the tank.
(1) Owner's name and address.
(2) Manufacturer’s gasoline cargo tank serial number.
(3) The gasoline cargo tank unit number.
(4) The gasoline cargo tank capacity.
(5) Whether the gasoline cargo tank was purged of gasoline vapors.
(6) The location of the test.
(7) The time of the test.
(8) The date of the test.

(9) Initial testing information:
(a) The time the test began.
(b) The initial pressure in inches of water.
(c) The finish time of the test.
(d) The final pressure of the test.
(e) The pressure change between the start and end of the test.
(f) If the initial pressure test failed:
(i) Record one set of readings in the row “Initial Test.”
(ii) Record the elapsed time if the pressure reached zero before five (5) minutes.
(iii) Record any repairs conducted.
(10) Testing Information for each test:
(a) The time the test began.
(b) The initial pressure in inches of water.
(c) The finish time of the test.
(d) The final pressure of the test; and
(e) The pressure change between the start and end of the test.
(11) The date of the next leakage test if the set of three (3) subtests are not all passed.
(12) The signature of the person conducting the vapor tightness test.
502 503 MONITORING FOR LEAKS: The Control Officer may at any time monitor a delivery vessel gasoline
cargo tank, including the vapor collection system, for vapor and liquid leaks to ascertain if it is vapor tight
and leak free. Leakage of vapor exceeding 1/5 of the lower explosive limit, or 10,000 ppm as methane,
when performed according to subsection 504.4, shall be an exceedance of the vapor-tight standard of
subsection 301.1. The Control Officer shall follow the test procedure in Section 503.1 of this rule and shall
use one or more of the methods in Sections 503.2 and 503.3 of this rule to determine vapor tight and leak
free conditions:
503.1 Combustible Gas Detector (CGD) Or An Organic Vapor Analyzer (OVA) - Test Procedure:
a. Calibration: Within four (4) hours prior to monitoring, the CGD or OVA shall be properly
calibrated for a 20 percent LEL response or to 10,000 ppm with methane.
b. Probe Distance: The probe inlet shall be one (1) inch (2.5 cm) or less from the potential leak
source when searching for leaks. The probe inlet shall be one (1) inch (2.5 cm) from the leak
source when the highest detector reading is being determined for a discovered leak. When the
probe is obstructed from moving within one (1) inch (2.5 cm) of an actual or potential leak
source, the closest practicable probe distance shall be used.
c. Probe Movement: The probe shall be moved slowly, not faster than 1.6 inches per second (4
centimeters per second). If there is any meter deflection at an actual or potential leak source,
the probe shall be positioned to locate the point of highest meter response.
d. Probe Position: The probe inlet shall be positioned in the path of the vapor flow from an
actual or potential leak such that the central axis of the probe-tube inlet shall be positioned
coaxially with the path of the most concentrated vapors.
e. Wind: Wind shall be blocked as much as possible from the space being monitored. The annual
leak detection test required by Section 401 of this rule shall be valid only when wind speed in the
space being monitored is five (5) mph or less.

f. Data Recording: The highest detector reading and location for each incidence of detected
leakage shall be recorded, along with the date and time. If no gasoline vapor is detected, that
fact shall be entered into the record.
503.2 Method 21-Determination Of Volatile Organic Compound Leaks, Alternative Screening
Procedure 8.3.3:
a. Spray a soap solution over all potential leak sources. The soap solution may be a
commercially available leak detection solution or may be prepared using concentrated
detergent and water. A pressure sprayer or squeeze bottle may be used to dispense the
solution.
b. Observe the potential leak sites to determine if any bubbles are formed.
(1) If no bubbles are observed, the source is presumed to have no detectable vapor leaks.
(2) If any bubbles are observed, the instrument techniques of Section 503.1 of this rule, shall
be used to verify if a vapor leak exists.
503.3 Optical Gas Imaging: A certified operator of a calibrated optical gas imaging device may use an
optical gas imaging instrument to identify vapor leaks. If a vapor leak is detected, the instrument
techniques listed in Section 503.1 of this rule shall be used to verify if a vapor leak exists.
503 504 COMPLIANCE: When more than one test method is permitted for a determination, an exceedance of the
limits established in the rule determined by any of the applicable test methods constitutes a violation of this
rule.
503.1 504.1 Pressure and Vacuum Tests: The tests to determine compliance with subsection 302.2a and
subsection 302.2c Section 501.1 of this rule shall be performed according to EPA Method 27 -
Determination of Vapor Tightness of Gasoline Delivery Tank Using Pressure Vacuum Test,
except that the definition of gasoline shall be according to this Rule 352 rule.
503.2 504.2 Test of Internal Vapor Valves: The tests to determine compliance with subsection
302.2b Section 501.1 of this rule, shall be performed immediately after successfully passing the
pressure subtest (pursuant to subsection 302.2a), without performing any intervening maintenance
or repair on the vapor valves.
503.3 504.3 Confirmation of a vapor leak detected on a vessel gasoline cargo tank during onloading loading
shall be determined by properly deploying a pressure tap adapter that conforms to Method 27
provisions, and demonstrating the leak according to subsection 504.4 Section 503 of this rule,
while the pressure is less than 20 inches of water column.
503.4 504.4 Pursuant to Section 203, Reid vapor pressure shall be determined using American Society for
Testing and Materials (ASTM) Method D 323-90 ASTM D323 - 15a: Standard Test Method for
Vapor Pressure of Petroleum Products (Reid Method).
504 505 TEST METHODS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE: The EPA test method as it exists in the Code
of Federal Regulations (CFR) (July 1, 1998), as listed below, is adopted by reference. The other test
methods listed here are also adopted by reference, each having paired with it a specific date that identifies
the particular version/revision of the method that is adopted by reference. These adoptions by reference
include no future editions or amendments. Copies of test methods referenced in this Section 504 are
available at the Maricopa County Air Quality Department, 1001 N. Central Ave., Phoenix, Arizona
85004. The following test methods are approved for use for the purpose of determining compliance with
this rule. The test methods are adopted by reference in Appendix G of the Maricopa County Air Pollution
Control Regulations. Alternative test methods as approved by the Administrator or other EPA-approved
test methods may be used upon prior written approval from the Control Officer. When more than one test
method is permitted for the same determination, an exceedance under any method will constitute a
violation. Copies of test methods referenced in this section are available at the Maricopa County Air
Quality Department, 1001 N. Central Avenue, Suite 125, Phoenix, AZ 85004-1942.

505.1 Optical Gas Imaging: Alternative Work Practice for Monitoring Equipment Leaks, 40 CFR
60.18(g). An owner or operator may use an optical gas imaging instrument instead of a 40 CFR
part 60, Appendix A-7, Method 21to monitor for equipment volatile organic compound leaks.
505.2 EPA Method 21 – Determination of Volatile Organic Compound Leaks.
504.1 505.3 EPA Method 27 (“Determination of Vapor Tightness of Gasoline Delivery Tank Using Pressure-
Vacuum Test.”) in 40 CFR 60, Appendix A.
504.2 505.4 American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) Method D 323-90, 1990 (Reid vapor
pressure). ASTM D323 - 15a: Standard Test Method for Vapor Pressure of Petroleum Products
(Reid Method).
504.3 Test of Internal Vapor Valves:
a. Pressurize the delivery vessel to 18 inches (45.7 cm) of water column, using the first 2
procedures of the "Pressure Test" section of EPA Method 27.
b. Close all the vessel's internal valves, including the internal vapor valves, thereby isolating the
vapor system (vapor return line plus vapor manifold) from the compartments.
c. Relieve the pressure in the vapor return line (to atmospheric pressure).
d. Seal the vapor return line and after 5.0 minutes record the pressure present in the vapor
system.
504.4 Delivery Vessel Vapor Tightness Test: A vapor tight condition will be determined for vessels by
the following method:
a. Calibration: Within 4 hours prior to monitoring, the combustible gas detector or organic vapor
analyzer shall be suitably calibrated for a 20 percent LEL response, or to 10,000 ppm with
methane.
b. Probe Distance: The probe inlet shall be 1 inch (2.5 cm) or less from the potential leak source
when searching for leaks. The probe inlet shall be 1 inch (2.5 cm) from the leak source when
the highest detector reading is being determined for a discovered leak. When the probe is
obstructed from moving within 1 inch (2.5 cm) of an actual or potential leak source, the
closest practicable probe distance shall be used.
c. Probe Movement: The probe shall be moved slowly, not faster than 1.6 inches per second (4
centimeters per second). If there is any meter deflection at a potential or actual leak source,
the probe shall be positioned to locate the point of highest meter response.
d. Probe Position: The probe inlet shall be positioned in the path of the vapor flow from a leak
such that the central axis of the probe-tube inlet shall be positioned coaxially with the path of
the most concentrated vapors.
e. Data Recording: The highest detector reading and location for each incidence of detected
leakage shall be recorded, along with the date and time. If no gasoline vapor is detected, that
fact shall be entered into the record.

Return to list of attachments
MARICOPA COUNTY BOARD OF HEALTH MEETING MINUTES
Monday, April 25, 2016
301 W. Jefferson Street, 10th Floor
Phoenix, Arizona 85003
Board of Supervisors Conference Room
President Kip Steill called the meeting to order at 3:09 p.m.
ROLL CALL:
Members Present: Members Excused:
Don Cassano Scott Somers
Nedra Halley Francisca Montoya
Andrew Kunasek
Debra Baldauff
Kip Steill
Don Hughes
Robert MacMillan
Michael Mills, M.D. (via phone)
Ex-Officio: Bob England, M.D.
CALL TO THE PUBLIC:
Mr. Kip Steill announced it was time for a call to the public and requested public comment forms
for those who wanted to speak or who wanted to address any action items.
Supervisor Kunasek introduced the newest Board of Health member, Mr. MacMillan.
DISCUSSION/ACTION ITEMS
1. Election of Board of Health Vice President:
Mr. Don Hughes was nominated as Vice President of the Board of Health. A motion was made by
Mr. Don Cassano and seconded by Ms. Nedra Halley and all were in favor. The motion passed
unanimously.
2. Approval of Minutes: President Steill asked for a motion to approve the minutes from the BOH
Meeting held on January 25, 2016. Motion was made by Ms. Nedra Halley to approve the BOH
minutes as presented. Motion was seconded by Mr. Don Cassano and the motion passed
unanimously.
3. Approval of Public Health FY 17 OMB Budget Recommendation Mr. Scot Pitcairn
The Board of Health Finance Committee recommended that the Board of Health approve Public
Health’s FY 17 OMB Budget Recommendation. Mr. Pitcairn was available to answer any questions
that the Board of Health had. Motion was made by Mr. Don Hughes to approve Public Health’s FY
17 OMB budget recommendation. Motion was seconded by Mr. Don Cassano and the motion
passed unanimously.
4. Approval of Environmental Services FY 17 OMB Budget Recommendation Ms. Diane Cabanillas
The Board of Health Finance Committee recommended that the Board of Health approve
Environmental Services’ FY 17 OMB Budget Recommendation. Ms. Cabanillas was available to
answer any questions that the Board of Health had. Motion was made by Mr. Don Hughes to
1

approve Environmental Services FY 17 OMB budget recommendation. Motion was seconded by Mr.
Halley and the motion passed unanimously.
5. Approval of the initiation of regulatory change for the ozone-related Mr. Philip A. McNeely
rulemakings
The rules being revised regarding ozone are the following:
Rule 241: Minor New Source Review
Rule 322: Power Plant Operations
Rule 323: Fuel Burning Equipment from Industrial/Commercial/Institutional Sources
Rule 324: Stationary Internal Combustion (IC) Engines
Rule 336: Surface Coating Operations
Rule 342: Coating Wood Furniture and Fixtures
Rule 350: Storage of Organic Liquids at Bulk Plants and Terminals
Rule 351: Loading of Organic Liquids
Rule 352: Gasoline Delivery Vessel Testing and Use
Rule 353: Gasoline In Stationary Dispensing Tanks
These rules are being closed for public comment and will be published May 13th. If there is no
further comment, the rules will go to the Board of Supervisors for a hearing. These rules are in
regards to non-attainment for the ozone standards. These rules are due to the EPA January 1, 2017
and have gone through the EROP/stakeholder meeting process. Every facility that has a permit will
receive information when rule changes are occurring via email. For more information on the
regulatory process: http://www.maricopa.gov/regulations/default.aspx
Motion was made by Mr. Don Cassano to approve the initiation of regulatory change for the
ozone-related rulemakings. Motion was seconded by Ms. Nedra Halley and the motion passed
unanimously.
6. Fee Waiver Applications Mr. Ken Conklin
Mr. Ken Conklin presented thirty-two (32) fee waivers for review and consideration of approval. A
summary sheet document was provided.
Motion to approve the 32 Fee Waiver applications was made by Ms. Nedra Halley, seconded by
Mr. Don Cassano and all were in favor. Motion passed unanimously.
Discussion Items:
1. Public Health Report: Dr. Bob England
i. Human Resources
ii. Communication
iii. Infrastructure
iv. Strategic Planning
v. Programs
vi. Disease Update
vii. Future Topics
Dr. Bob provided the Board of Health with the updated Public Health org chart. The re-org has
aligned MCDPH into programmatic divisions. Previously, MCDPH was organized by funding stream.
Dr. Bob briefed the board on funding cuts that the department is receiving, including a $300,000
cut to WIC and $230,000 cut to the Office of Preparedness and Response (CDC is pulling some
money back for the Zika response). WIC is struggling to meet a target number of clients but each
time the program doesn’t meet the target, the number of target clients and funding is decreased.
The reason for difficulties with reaching the target number of client is that client encounter has
2

become increasingly more complex. The Office of Vital Records is moving their St. Mary’s Food
Bank location to a location near the 1-17 and Dunlap. MCDPH is no longer tracking returning
travelers from ebola stricken countries. Arizona has experienced the highest level of severity in the
country for flu for hospitalization and death rates. CDC is gathering data but there may not be
enough lab evidence to determine a cause. Zika virus is another of the flaviviruses that is associated
with significant neurological defects in infants whose mothers were infected with the virus in the
first two trimesters of pregnancy. The primary vector is Aedes Aegypti mosquitos. In Maricopa
County, there is no endemic spread of zika; only one travel associated case. The strategy when
there is a travel associated case is to have the individual stay inside, wear repellant, and when
necessary, have Environmental Services do traps and remediation depending on consent. There is
concern regarding the process and timeline it would take to enter private property if necessary to
spray for this type of mosquito. The Surgeon General will be visiting Arizona in May to do a tour on
opioid use. The NACCHO Annual meeting will be July 19 – 21 in Phoenix.
ANNOUNCEMENTS AND CURRENT EVENTS
 Next meeting is July 25, 2016
ADJOURNMENT: There being no further business, motion to adjourn the meeting was made by Mr.
Don Cassano, seconded by Ms. Halley and motion was passed unanimously. The meeting was
adjourned at 4:27 p.m.
3

Return to list of attachments


Return to list of attachments
Executive Summary
of the Report to the Board of Supervisors
Prepared by the Maricopa County Air Quality Department
Board Hearing Date: November 2, 2016
Case #/Title: AQ-2015-008-Rule 353 (Gasoline In Stationary Dispensing Tanks)
Agenda Item:
Supervisor Districts: All Districts
The Maricopa County Air Quality Department (department) complied with all statutory and county policies
throughout this rulemaking process. Per the Enhanced Regulatory Outreach Program (EROP) Policy: “In addition
to the required staff report, an executive summary of the report including an overview of stakeholder input and
staff responses will be provided to the Board of Supervisors at least one week prior to any Board of Supervisors’
public hearing.”
Overview Of The Report To The Board Of Supervisors:
The department is requesting the Board of Supervisors to approve amendments to Maricopa County Air Pollution
Control Regulations regarding Rule 353 (Gasoline In Stationary Dispensing Tanks) and approve submitting the
amended rules as a revision to the (Arizona) State Implementation Plan (SIP).
The purpose of this rulemaking is to revise Rule 353 to be consistent with current gasoline industry terms and
definitions, to clarify the storage and loading requirements of an underground storage tank and an above ground
storage tank, to update test methods to be consistent with state and federal test methods, and to clarify the
inspection requirement for gasoline dispensing facilities that receive gasoline less than once per week. In addition,
the proposed revisions to Rule 353 will address the requirements of the SIP for “moderate” nonattainment for the
2008 eight-hour ozone national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS). The proposed amendments in Rule 353
include Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT) for volatile organic compounds (VOCs).
Overview Of Stakeholder Input And Staff Responses:
Stakeholder Workshops were held: June 30, 2015, September 14, 2015, and February 22, 2016. Workshop
discussions included the following:
• Clarification of current rule language and definitions to be consistent with the federal language for gasoline
dispensing facilities
• Addition of an alternative to the installation of only California Air Resources Board (CARB) certified
equipment
• Addition of the definition of “submerged fill” to be consistent throughout the gasoline-related rules
• Clarification of the requirements for above ground storage tanks and under ground storage tanks
• Clarification of availablility of required records
A 30-day comment period was held May-June 2016. During the 30-day comment period, the department received
comments from the Arizona Public Service Company (APS) and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA); they stated their opinion as “support” or “other”. APS’ comment regarded clarifying monitoring
requirements for leaks in gasoline storage tanks and the EPA’s comment regarded the exemption for farm
operations. The department addressed APS’s comment by changing the “monitoring for leaks” requirement to
“determination of vapor tight status” (“vapor tight” is defined in Rule 353). The department addressed the EPA’s
comment by conducting an analysis of agricultural gasoline tanks in Maricopa County. Per such analysis, the

VOC emissions from agricultural gasoline tanks are less than 0.01 percent of the VOC emissions from gasoline
stations in Maricopa County and are 0.0005% of the annual VOC emissions from all area sources in Maricopa
County. Therefore, the department is proposing to retain the exemption in Rule 353 for farm operations. The
department addressed all of the comments; responses have been incorporated into the draft rule and are explained
in the Preamble of the Draft Notice of Final Rulemaking.

Return to list of attachments
Report to the Board of Supervisors
Prepared by the Maricopa County Air Quality Department
Board of Health Meeting Date: April 25, 2016
Board Hearing Date: November 2, 2016
Case #/Title: AQ-2015-008-Rule 353 (Gasoline In Stationary Dispensing Tanks)
Agenda Item:
Supervisor Districts: All Districts
Applicant: Staff
Request: Approve amendments to Maricopa County Air Pollution Control
Regulations regarding Rule 353 (Gasoline in Stationary Dispensing
Tanks) and approve submitting the amended rule as a revision to the
(Arizona) State Implementation Plan (SIP).
The purpose of this rulemaking is to revise the rule to be consistent with
current gasoline industry terms and definitions, to clarify the storage and
loading requirements of an underground storage tank and an above
ground storage tank, to update test methods to be consistent with state
and federal test methods and to clarify the inspection requirement for
gasoline dispensing facilities that receive gasoline less than once per
week. In addition, the proposed revisions to Rule 353 will address the
requirements of the SIP for “moderate” nonattainment for the 2008 eight-
hour ozone national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS). The
proposed amendments in Rule 353 include Reasonably Available Control
Technology (RACT) for volatile organic compounds (VOCs).
Support/Opposition: During the 30-day comment period, the department received comments
from the Arizona Public Service Company (APS) and the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA); they stated their opinion as
“support” or “other”. APS’ comment regarded clarifying monitoring
requirements for leaks in gasoline storage tanks and the EPA’s comment
regarded the exemption for farm operations. The department addressed
APS’s comment by changing the “monitoring for leaks” requirement to
“determination of vapor tight status” (“vapor tight” is defined in Rule
353). The department addressed the EPA’s comment by conducting an
analysis of agricultural gasoline tanks in Maricopa County. Per such
analysis, the VOC emissions from agricultural gasoline tanks are less
than 0.01 percent of the VOC emissions from gasoline stations in
Maricopa County and are 0.0005% of the annual VOC emissions from
all area sources in Maricopa County. Therefore, the department is
proposing to retain the exemption in Rule 353 for farm operations. The
department addressed all of the comments; responses have been
incorporated into the draft rule and are explained in the Preamble of the
Draft Notice of Final Rulemaking.
Staff
Recommendation: Approve
Board of Health

Recommendation: Approve per Staff recommended language
Additional
Comments: This regulatory change is following the Enhanced Regulatory Outreach
Program (EROP) Policy and workflow process. The County Manager
briefed the Board of Supervisors regarding this rulemaking in May 2015.
Stakeholder workshops were held June 2015 through February 2016. On
April 25, 2016, the Board of Health approved this regulatory change for
the Expedited Process.
Presented By: Philip A. McNeely, R.G., Director
Prepared By: Hether Krause
Attachments: Summary of the proposed regulatory change (See Item 6 of the Draft
Notice of Final Rulemaking)
Analysis of input received during the process and how that input was
responded to (See Item 13 of the Draft Notice of Final Rulemaking)
Language of proposed regulatory change or amendment (See Item 17 of
the Draft Notice of Final Rulemaking)
Preamble required by Arizona Revised Statutes (A.R.S.) § 49-471.05
(See Draft Notice of Final Rulemaking)
Minutes from Board of Health meeting
Copies of all written and electronic Stakeholder input
Signed copy of the Maricopa County Resolution “Moratorium on
Increased Regulatory Burdens”

Return to list of attachments
DRAFT NOTICE OF FINAL RULEMAKING
MARICOPA COUNTY AIR POLLUTION CONTROL REGULATIONS
REGULATION III – CONTROL OF AIR CONTAMINANTS
RULE 353: GASOLINE IN STATIONARY DISPENSING TANKS
PREAMBLE
1. Rule affected Rulemaking action
Rule 353: Gasoline In Stationary Dispensing Tanks Amended
2. Statutory authority for the rulemaking:
Authorizing statutes: A.R.S. §§ 49-474, 49-479, and 49-480
Implementing Statute: A.R.S. § 49-112
3. The effective date of the rule:
Tentative date of adoption: November 2, 2016
4. List of public notices addressing this rulemaking:
Notice of Briefing to Maricopa County Manager: May 2015
Notice of Stakeholder Workshops: June 30, 2015, September 14, 2015, and February 22, 2016
Notice of Maricopa County Board of Health Meeting: April 25, 2016
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking: 22 A.A.R. 1257, May 13, 2016
5. Name and address of department personnel with whom persons may communicate regarding the
rulemaking:
Name: Cheri Dale or Hether Krause
Maricopa County Air Quality Department
Planning and Analysis Division
Address: 1001 N Central Avenue, Suite 125
Phoenix, Arizona 85004
Telephone: (602) 506-6010
Fax: (602) 506-6179
E-Mail: aqplanning@mail.maricopa.gov Return to list of attachments
6. Explanation of the rule, including the department's reasons for initiating the rulemaking:
Summary: Rule 353 (Gasoline In Stationary Dispensing Tanks) limits the emission of volatile organic
compounds (VOCs) from gasoline stored in stationary dispensing tanks and from gasoline delivered into
such tanks. Revisions to Rule 353 addressed the requirements of the State Implementation Plan (SIP) for
“moderate” nonattainment for the 2008 eight-hour ozone national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS).
The Maricopa County Air Quality Department (department) revised Rule 353 to be consistent with current
gasoline industry terms and definitions, clarified the storage and loading requirements of an underground
storage tank and an above ground storage tank, updated test methods to be consistent with state and federal
test methods, and clarified the inspection requirement for gasoline dispensing facilities that receive gasoline
less than once per week.
In addition, the amendments corrected typographical or other clerical errors; made minor grammatical
changes to improve readability or clarity; modified the format, numbering, order, capitalization,
punctuation, or syntax of certain text to increase standardization within and among rules; or made various
other minor changes of a purely editorial nature. As these changes do not alter the sense, meaning, or effect

of the rules, they are not described in detail here, but can be readily discerned in the “underline/ strikeout”
version of the rules contained in Item 17 of this notice.
Background: In the early 1970’s, the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) issued
transportation control plans that included requirements to control VOC emissions during the loading of
gasoline into a storage tank. In 1978, the EPA followed up by issuing a Control Techniques Guideline
(CTG) for the “Control of Volatile Organic Compound Leaks from Gasoline Tank Trucks and Vapor
Collection Systems.” The purpose of this CTG was to “…define leak tight conditions and related test
procedures for vapor collection systems and tank trucks while loading and unloading …” The CTG
represented the reasonably available control technology (RACT) that could be applied to existing facilities.
The CTG was issued to provide a guideline for areas of nonattainment for the NAAQS.
The Clean Air Act Amendments (CAAA) of 1990 required ozone nonattainment areas to implement RACT
to control VOC emissions. This RACT determination for the associated industry was to be incorporated
into the SIP. RACT is defined by the EPA as “The lowest emission limitation that a particular source is
capable of meeting by the application of control technology that is reasonably available considering
technological and economic feasibility.” (44 FR53761, September 17, 1979) To assist state and local
agencies in determining RACT, the EPA issues CTGs for specific sources. A CTG describes the
“presumptive norm” for RACT and includes a review of current knowledge, technology and costs of a
variety of emission control techniques. These guidelines provide state and local environmental agencies a
guide in establishing RACT regulations for gasoline dispensing operations. The state or local agency can
then use the presumptive norm for RACT or develop more stringent measures to meet the established
ozone standards.
On January 10, 2008, the EPA issued the National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutant
(NESHAP) for Source Category: Gasoline Dispensing Facilities (73 FR 1945). The NESHAP set forth
national emission limits and identified management practices for the gasoline dispensing facilities. Most
importantly, the NESHAP did not exclude any gasoline storage tank from the management practices, no
matter what the gasoline storage tank capacity.
Rule 353 Rulemaking Background: Maricopa County drafted the first county-wide air quality rules
pertaining to the storage and loading of gasoline in the 1970’s. Rule 33 put into rule requirements for the
storage and handling of petroleum products. In the 1980’s, Rule 33 was broken into specific sections to
address bulk loading facilities, delivery vessels, and loading into stationary storage tanks. Rule 33.3
(Loading into Stationary Storage Containers) specifically addressed the control of VOC emissions from
gasoline service stations (now referred to as gasoline dispensing facilities). Rule 33.3 was submitted for
inclusion in the 1982 Arizona State Implementation Plan (SIP). The rule included requirements for loading
to include the use of submerged fill and the capture of at least 90% of the gasoline vapors displaced during
the loading of gasoline. Gasoline storage tanks that were used “exclusively for the fueling of implements of
normal cultural farm practices…” were exempted from the rule. Partial exemptions provided for storage
tanks with under 1,000 gallon capacity; non-resale gasoline storage tanks; and tanks installed prior to
specific dates. In 1985, Rule 33.3 was again submitted to the EPA for inclusion into the SIP. Per the
department evaluation on February 11, 1986, Rule 33.3 was consistent with the requirements in the Clean
Air Act and 40 CFR 51.22.
The department again revised Rule 33 in order to submit the rules as part of the NAAQS SIP. On July 13,
1988, the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors adopted revisions to Rule 33.3 to include the
renumbering of Rule 33.3 to Rule 353 (Transfer of Gasoline into Stationary Storage Tanks); and the
reformatting of the rule.
In 1992, the department revised Rule 353 to be consistent with the RACT guidance documents issued by
the EPA in 1978. These revisions included the incorporation of EPA policy statements that were issued
after the promulgation of the RACT guidance documents.
The 1999 revisions by the department clarified the responsibility of owners and operators of gasoline
dispensing facilities with respect to vapor recovery equipment. The fill pipe and vapor recovery return
provisions were expanded. A dual point vapor recovery system was required to be installed in each new
gasoline storage tank or when a major modification occurred. California Air Resources Board (CARB)
certified equipment was required for Stage I vapor recovery systems. The installation of poppetted valves

was required. Standards were included for spill containment devices. Leak detection test procedures were
spelled out in detail. Record retention was expanded to five years. These revisions currently are in place.7
A limited scope revision to Rule 353 was drafted in 2013 (19 A.A.R. 3636, November 22, 2013) to delete
the definition of non-precursor organic compound. The department relocated the list of EPA recognized
“non-precursor organic compounds” (40 CFR 51.100(s)) into Maricopa County Air Pollution Control
Regulations, Appendix G (Incorporated Materials) to provide a means to expeditiously update any
revisions to the EPA definition of VOC.
Issues Raised and Discussed During This Rulemaking Process:
The department held three Stakeholder Workshops: June 30, 2015, September 14, 2015, and February 22,
2016. Stakeholders included representatives from APS, Caljet, CDM Smith, Cemex, City of Glendale, City
of Mesa, City of Phoenix, EnCore Consulting, Envirosure Solutions, Kiewit, Pinal County, SRP,
Washington Elementary School, and the EPA.
The department revised Rule 353 definitions for consistency with current gasoline industry terms and
definitions, clarified the storage and loading requirements of an underground storage tank and an above
ground storage tank, updated test methods to be consistent with state and federal test methods, and clarified
the inspection requirement for gasoline dispensing facilities that receive gasoline less than once per week.
Previously (December 20, 2000) the department had issued a technical guidance, #TG00-002, addressing
the issue of inspection of gasoline dispensing tanks that receive a load of gasoline once per week. Per the
discussion in the document, “The intended purpose of requiring inspections…is to assure both that the fill
and vapor return assemblies are fit to receive gasoline and that the integrity of these assemblies is
maintained so as to prevent gasoline evaporation between deliveries.” The guidance concluded that if
gasoline was loaded at a frequency of less than once per week, that the inspection and recording of the
inspection could be conducted at the time of each gasoline delivery. The department incorporated the
inspection frequency for less than weekly gasoline deliveries into Section 401.2(b) of this rule and
rescinded #TG00-002.
The department revised the rule title to “Storage and Loading of Gasoline at Gasoline Dispensing
Facilities” to clarify the specific site activities that this rule applies to. In addition, the purpose and
applicability sections are revised to further add clarification in the rule.
Current rule language and definitions were not consistent between the county rules relating to gasoline nor
with the federal language for gasoline dispensing facilities. The department revised rule language and
definitions to be consistent with other Maricopa County rules and federal rule language. This provides
consistency between regulatory agencies and between rules to provide clear and consistent definitions and
terms for Stakeholders. At the workshops, it was discussed as to how many terms used in the federal
regulations should or are reasonable to include in local rules. The Stakeholders and department staff
recommended that definitions that are applicable to the county should be included but not necessarily all
the federal definitions.
During the initial phase of the Rule 353 rulemaking process, the department initially proposed to
consolidate Rule 352 (Gasoline Delivery Vessel Testing And Use) and Rule 353. At the workshops,
Stakeholders expressed confusion and questioned the reasoning as to why the two rules should be
combined. The department initially felt that combining the two rules would clarify the responsibilities of
the cargo tank operators especially when loading gasoline into and out of stationary gasoline storage tanks.
Further discussions with Stakeholders and department staff indicated the proposed consolidation of the two
rules added confusion rather than clarified responsibilities. The department agreed and revised Rule 352
and Rule 353 as separate rules.
Prior to the opening of the rule for revisions, Stakeholders were questioning the specific requirements for
an above ground storage tank. Questions centered around the requirement and use of a spill containment
receptacle for the fill pipe on an above ground storage tank. To clarify all the requirements for both the
above ground storage tanks and the underground storage tanks, the department drafted separate rule
sections for each.
The department revised Section 503.4 to require records to be made available to the Control Officer within
24 hours upon verbal or written request. This provides a specific time frame for the owner or operator of a

gasoline dispensing facility to remotely access records stored off-site. This also provides consistency within
the department when requesting records. There was no discussion brought up at any of the Stakeholder
Workshops on this revision.
The department defined “submerged fill” to be consistent throughout the gasoline rules. The department
included a graphic depicting the types of fill piping in the definition. Stakeholders agreed the graphic added
value to the definition and recommended including it in the rule.
Description of Proposed Amendments:
Amended the following throughout the rule:
 Deleted the wording “stationary dispensing operation” and replaced with “gasoline dispensing facility”
 Deleted the word “transfer” and replace with “load”
 Deleted the wording “2-Point” and replace with “dual-point”
 Deleted the word “person” and replace with “owner or operator”
 Deleted past compliance dates
 Added or revised specific rule section references
 Added “stationary” to describe the type of storage tank
Amended the following in Section 100:
 Revised Section 101 (Purpose) to include the storage and loading of gasoline at gasoline dispensing
facilities
 Revised Section 102 (Applicability) to apply to an owner or operator of a gasoline dispensing facility
 Added Section 103 (Exemptions)
Amended the following in Section 200:
 Added the definition AVIATION GASOLINE (AVGAS)
 Revised the definition CARB-CERTIFIED
 Added the definition COAXIAL VAPOR BALANCE SYSTEM
 Deleted the definition DISPENSING TANK
 Added the definition DUAL-POINT VAPOR BALANCE SYSTEM
 Revised the definition EXCESS GASOLINE DRAINAGE
 Revised the definition GASOLINE
 Deleted the definition GASOLINE DELIVERY VESSEL
 Added the definition GASOLINE CARGO TANK
 Deleted the definition GASOLINE DISPENSING OPERATION
 Added the definition GASOLINE DISPENSING FACILITY
 Deleted the definition INSTALLER
 Added the definition MARICOPA COUNTY (MC) VAPOR TIGHTNESS TEST
 Deleted the definition OFFSET FILL LINE
 Revised the definition POPPETTED DRY BREAK
 Added the definition PURGING
 Deleted the definition SIDE FILL PIPE
 Revised the definition STAGE I VAPOR RECOVERY

 Added the definition STATIONARY GASOLINE DISPENSING TANK
 Added the definition SUBMERGED FILL
 Deleted the definition TOP FILL or VERTICAL FILL PIPE
 Revised the definition VAPOR LOSS CONTROL DEVICE
 Revised the definition VAPOR TIGHT
Ameded the following in Section 300:
 Deleted Section 300 (Standards-Vapor Loss Control Measures Required)
 Deleted Section 301 (Basic Tank Integrity)
 Deleted Section 302 (Fill Pipe Requirements)
 Deleted Section 303 (Vapor Recovery System)
 Deleted Section 304 (Equipment Maintenance and Use Required)
 Deleted Section 305 (Exemptions)
 Added Section 300 (Standards)
 Added Section 301 (Manufacturers, Suppliers and Owner or Operator)
 Added Section 302 (General Housekeeping Requirements)
 Added Section 303 (Gasoline Storage Equipment and Operation Requirements)
 Added Section 303.1 (Underground Storage Tank (UST))
 Added Section 303.2 (Above Ground Storage Tank (AST))
 Added Section 304 (Loading of Gasoline)
 Added Section 305 (Control of VOC Vapors)
 Added Section 305.1 (Gasoline vapors displaced…)
 Added Section 305.2 (Stage 1 Vapor Recovery System Configuration)
 Added Section 305.3 (Equipment Maintenance and Use Required)
Amended the following in Section 400:
 Deleted Section 401 (Tanks that Lost Their Exemption)
 Added Section 401 (Inspections)
 Revised Section 402.1 (Proving Exempt Status)
 Revised Section 402.2 (Providing Proof of Equipment Compliance)
 Revised Section 403 (CARB Decertification)
 Revised Section 404 (Other Agencies Requirements)
Amended the following in Section 500:
 Renumbered Section 501 (Compliance Inspections) to Section 502
 Added Section 501 (Determining Vapor Tight Status)
 Added Section 501.1 (Combustible Gas Detector or Organic Vapor Analyzer - Test Procedure)
 Added Section 501.2 (Method 21-Determination of Volatile Organic Compound Leaks, Alternative
Screening Procedure 8.3.3)
 Added Section 501.3 (Optical Gas Imaging)

 Renumbered Section 502 (Recordkeeping) to Section 503 (Gasoline Dispensing Facility
Recordkeeping) and Revised
 Renumbered Section 503 to Section 504 and Revised
 Renumbered Section 503.1 to Section 504.1 and Revised
 Renumbered Section 503.2 to Section 504.2 and Revised
 Renumbered Section 503.3 to Section 504.3 and Revised
 Deleted Section 503.4
 Renumbered Section 504 (Test Methods) to Section 505 and Revised
 Renumbered Section 504.1 (EPA Test Methods) to Section 505.1 and Revised
 Renumbered Section 505.2 (Gasoline Vapor Pressure) and Renumbered Section 505.2 (ASTM
Standards) and Revised
 Deleted Section 504.3 (Leak Detection Test Method)
 Renumbered Section 504.4 to Section 505.3 (CARB Certification and Test Procedures for Gasoline
Vapor Recovery Systems) and Revised
 Added Section 505.5 (Additional Test Methods)
7. Demonstration of compliance with A.R.S. §49-112:
Under A.R.S. § 49-479(C), a county may not adopt a rule or ordinance that is more stringent than the rules
adopted by the Director of the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ) for similar sources
unless it demonstrates compliance with the applicable requirements of A.R.S. §49-112.
§ 49-112 County regulation; standards
§ 49-112(A)
When authorized by law, a county may adopt a rule, ordinance or other regulation that is more stringent
than or in addition to a provision of this title or rule adopted by the director or any board or commission
authorized to adopt rules pursuant to this title if all of the following conditions are met:
1. The rule, ordinance or other regulation is necessary to address a peculiar local condition.
2. There is credible evidence that the rule, ordinance or other regulation is either;
(a) Necessary to prevent a significant threat to public health or the environment that results from a
peculiar local condition and is technically and economically feasible.
(b) Required under a federal statute or regulation, or authorized pursuant to an intergovernmental
agreement with the federal government to enforce federal statutes or regulations if the county rule,
ordinance or other regulation is equivalent to federal statutes or regulation.
3. Any fee or tax adopted under the rule, ordinance or other regulation will not exceed the reasonable
costs of the county to issue and administer that permit or plan approval program.
§ 49-112(B)
When authorized by law, a county may adopt rules, ordinances or other regulations in lieu of a state
program that are as stringent as a provision of this title or rule adopted by the director or any board or
commission authorized to adopt rules pursuant to this title if the county demonstrates that the cost of
obtaining permits or other approvals from the county will approximately equal or be less than the fee or
cost of obtaining similar permits or approvals under this title or any rule adopted pursuant to this title. If the
state has not adopted a fee or tax for similar permits or approvals, the county may adopt a fee when
authorized by law in the rule, ordinance or other regulation that does not exceed the reasonable costs of the
county to issue and administer that permit or plan approval program.

The department complies with A.R.S. § 49-112(A) in that Maricopa County fails to meet the National
Ambient Air Quality Standards for both ozone and particulates. The County failed to meet 2008 8-hour
ozone standard by the marginal area attainment date of July 20, 2015. The EPA issued a final rule, effective
June 3, 2016, reclassifying the Maricopa County area to “moderate” (published at 86 FR 26697, May 4,
2016). Further, a portion of the County was classified as a serious ozone nonattainment area under the
previous 1-hour ozone standard requiring the County to continue to maintain the measures and
requirements that allowed the County to attain that standard. Currently, a portion of Maricopa County and
Apache Junction in Pinal County is designated serious nonattainment for the PM10 24-hour standard. This
is the only serious PM10 nonattainment area in Arizona. Revisions to Rule 353 address the requirements of
the State Implementation Plan (SIP) for “moderate” nonattainment for the 2008 eight-hour ozone national
ambient air quality standard (NAAQS). The amendments in Rule 353 include Reasonably Available
Control Technology (RACT).
The department complies with A.R.S. § 49-112(B) in that the amendments to Rule 353 are not more
stringent than or in addition to a provision of Title 49 or rule adopted by the director or any board or
commission authorized to adopt rules pursuant to Title 49, address the peculiar local conditions in
Maricopa County, are authorized under A.R.S. Title 49, Chapter 3, Article 3, and are not in lieu of a state
program.
8. Documents or studies referenced and/or reviewed for this rulemaking:
Not applicable
9. Showing of good cause why the rule is necessary to promote a statewide interest if the rule will
diminish a previous grant of authority of a political subdivision:
Not applicable
10. Summary of the economic, small business, and consumer impact:
The following discussion addresses each of the elements required for an economic, small business and
consumer impact statement under A.R.S. § 41-1055.
An identification of the rulemaking.
This rulemaking revised Rule 353 (Gasoline in Stationary Dispensing Tanks). The revised rule is titled:
Storage and Loading of Gasoline at Gasoline Dispensing Facilities.
An identification of the persons who will be directly affected by, bear the costs of or directly benefit
from the rulemaking.
The persons who will be directly affected by and bear the costs of this rulemaking to revised Rule 353 will
be facilities in Maricopa County that own or operate a gasoline dispensing facility, including those located
at airports. The department has issued a Title V or a Non-Title V permit to 165 facilities subject to Rule
353. The economic summary is based on the number of Title V and Non-Title V permits issued by the
Maricopa County Air Quality Department.
A cost benefit analysis of the following:
(a) The probable costs and benefits to the implementing agency and other agencies directly affected
by the implementation and enforcement of the rulemaking.
Because this rulemaking did not impose any new compliance burdens on permitted regulated entities
or introduce additional regulatory requirements, the department deemed that none of the revisions have
potentially significant economic impacts on permitted sources. It is expected that the department will
benefit from the increased clarity of the rule with decreased time to inspect a facility or prepare a
permit. In addition, the rulemaking did not impose increased monetary or regulatory costs on other
state agencies, political subdivisions of this state, persons, or individuals so regulated.
The benefits of the rule revision are anticipated to be a result of the following changes:
- Clarification of the storage and loading requirements of an underground storage tank and an above
ground storage tank;

- Updated test methods to be consistent with state and federal test methods;
- Clarification of the inspection requirement for gasoline dispensing facilities that receive gasoline
less than once per week;
- Correction of typographical or other clerical errors and made minor grammatical changes to
improve readability or clarity;
- Modification of the format, numbering, order, capitalization, punctuation, or syntax of certain text
to increase standardization within and among rules.
The sources subject to revised Rule 353 already have permits in which these requirements are
addressed. Therefore, this revised rule does not impose new requirements on the permitted facilities,
and no costs would be incurred for compliance with the rule revisions.
(b) The probable costs and benefits to a political subdivision of this state directly affected by the
implementation and enforcement of the rulemaking
The rule revisions do not impose increased monetary or regulatory costs on other state agencies,
political subdivisions of this state, persons, or individuals so regulated.
(c) The probable costs and benefits to businesses directly affected by the rulemaking, including any
anticipated effect on the revenues or payroll expenditures of employers who are subject to the
rulemaking.
The department anticipates that increased clarity provided by the Rule 353 revisions will provide a
benefit to the regulated community; it will take less time for sources subject to the rule to understand
and comply with the rule, which leads to increased compliance, which leads to decreased costs of
compliance to the regulated community. The department does not anticipate these rule revisions to
have a significant impact on a person's income, revenue, or employment in this state related to this
activity. The rule revision did not impose increased monetary or regulatory costs on individuals so
regulated.
A general description of the probable impact on private and public employment in businesses,
agencies and political subdivisions of this state directly affected by the rulemaking.
The rule revisions did not impose increased monetary or regulatory costs on other state agencies, political
subdivisions of this state, persons, or individuals so regulated.
A statement of the probable impact of the rulemaking on small businesses.
The rule revisions did not impose increased monetary or regulatory costs on any permitted business,
persons, or individuals so regulated.
(a) An identification of the small businesses subject to the rulemaking.
Small businesses subject to this rulemaking are those facilities in Maricopa County the owner or
operate a gasoline dispensing facility.
(b) The administrative and other costs required for compliance with the rulemaking.
This rulemaking updated and clarified existing rule provisions and definitions to be consistent with
federal performance standards; and to reduce confusion and improve understanding and readability.
The department considered the implications of the proposed amendments to the regulated entities and
the implementing agency and deemed that none of the rule revisions had potentially significant
economic impacts.
(c) A description of the methods that the agency may use to reduce the impact on small businesses.
(i) Establishing less costly compliance requirements in the rulemaking for small businesses.
By correcting and clarifying existing rule provisions and definitions, this rulemaking lessens or
eases the regulatory burden for small businesses.

(ii) Establishing less costly schedules or less stringent deadlines for compliance in the
rulemaking.
This rulemaking corrected or clarified existing rule provisions and definitions to reduce confusion
and improve understanding and readability.
(iii) Exempting small businesses from any or all requirements of the rulemaking.
This rulemaking corrected or clarified existing rule provisions and definitions to reduce confusion
and improve understanding and readability.
(d) The probable cost and benefit to private persons and consumers who are directly affected by the
rulemaking.
This rulemaking did not impose any new compliance burdens on regulated entities that are permitted
or introduce additional regulatory requirements and will not impose increased monetary or regulatory
costs on any permitted business, persons, or individuals so regulated. As such, there are no costs to
pass through to consumers which means there are no impacts on consumers.
A statement of the probable effect on state revenues.
The rule revisions did not impose increased monetary or regulatory costs on other state agencies, political
subdivisions of this state, persons, or individuals so regulated. Without costs to pass through to customers,
there is no projected change in consumer purchase patterns and, thus, no impact on state revenues from
sales taxes.
A description of any less intrusive or less costly alternative methods of achieving the purpose of the
rulemaking.
This rulemaking corrected or clarified existing rule provisions and definitions to reduce confusion and
improve understanding and readability.
11. Name and address of department personnel with whom persons may communicate regarding the
accuracy of the economic, small business, and consumer impact:
Name: Cheri Dale or Hether Krause
Maricopa County Air Quality Department
Planning and Analysis Division
Address: 1001 N Central Avenue, Suite 125
Phoenix, AZ 85004
Telephone: (602) 506-6010
Fax: (602) 506-6179
E-Mail: aqplanning@mail.maricopa.gov
12. Description of the changes between the proposed rule, including supplemental notices and final rule:
Since the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking was published on May 13, 2016 (22 A.A.R 1257), the
department is proposing the following additional amendments:
• Throughout the rule, included both English and metric units of measure for consistency.
• Section 101 (Purpose): Made the purpose statement more succinct by deleting “from gasoline”.
• Section 102 (Applicability): Retained original text regarding Rule 353 applying to stationary gasoline
dispensing tanks with a capacity of more than 250 gallons.
• Section 103.5: Revised the wording from “…shall remain subject to such provisions even if annual
emissions ” to “…shall remain subject to such provisions even if the annual amount of gasoline
received…” The 120,000 gallon threshold is a quantity of gasoline delivered and not an emission
threshold.

• Section 202: The original definition of a DISPENSING TANK was added and struck out because the
definition was deleted. In Section 215, added the definition of STATIONARY GASOLINE
DISPENSING TANK, now shown as new language and underlined. The notice of proposed rulemaking
indicated that Section 202 was “moved” to Section 215. Since the strikeout of Section 202 occurred later
in Section 200, it appeared that numbering was out of sequence. To avoid any confusion as to what
happened to the original Section 202 DISPENSING TANK definition, Section 202 DISPENSING
TANK definition was re-inserted in sequential order and struck out as deleted. Section 215 was added to
indicate a new definition and now is underlined. There were no revisions between the definition found in
the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking and the definition in this document.
• Section 213 (Renumbered to 214): Deleted the term “delivery vessel” and inserted the term “gasoline
cargo tank” to be consistent throughout rule.
• Section 216.3: Deleted, in definition of “Submerged Fill”, text regarding API Standard 650 Compliant,
because such provision is applicable to organic liquids not gasoline.
• Section 208: Added the acronym (GDF) to the definition of a GASOLINE DISPENSING FACILITY
since the acronym is used in Section 300.
• Section 215: Added the word “GASOLINE” to the definition of a STATIONARY GASOLINE
DISPENSING TANK for consistency throughout rule.
• Section 216: Deleted the word “tanks” from “Top-Fill or Bottom-Fill” definition.
• Section 303.1: Revised the wording to clarify the size of gasoline storage tank the section applies to. The
revised wording of Section 303.1: “Underground Storage Tank (UST): An UST with a capacity more
than 250 gallons (946 l) must meet all of the following conditions …” The revision will maintain
consistency throughout the rule with the applicable standards. This also maintains the previous Rule 353
gasoline storage tank capacity; therefore, there is no rule relaxation or additional requirement with this
revision.
• Section 404 (Other Agencies’ Requirements): Struck out the wording “Arizona Department of Weights
and Measures.” The Arizona Department of Weights and Measures name was changed to “Arizona
Department of Agriculture, Weights and Measures Services Division” on July 1, 2016.
• Section 501: The title was revised from MONITORING FOR LEAKS to DETERMINING VAPOR
TIGHT STATUS to clarify the intent of the section was not to monitor for vapor leaks but to provide a
means of determining if a vapor leak was occurring. The owner or operator or the Control Officer is the
person or persons that determine the vapor tight status.
• Section 501.1: Added the acronyms for combustible gas detector (CGD) and organic vapor analyzer
(OVA)
• Section 503.4: Retained original text regarding records having to be made available without delay instead
of having to be made available within 24 hours.
• Sections 504 And 505: Included text in Sections 504 and 505 that allows for the use of alternative test
methods to determine compliance with the rule and that allows test methods as approved by the
Administrator to be used and clarified the provision regarding when more than one test method is
permitted for a compliance determination.
• Section 505.4(a): The text in this section was not shown as new text (underlined); this has been corrected.
13. Summary of the comments made regarding the rule and the department response to them:
Since the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking was published on May 13, 2016 (22 A.A.R. 1257), the
department received comments from the Arizona Public Service Company (APS) and the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). The comments and the department’s responses are provided
below.
Comment #1: Section 103.4 (Exemptions-Stationary Gasoline Dispensing Tanks For Farm Operations)
Return to list of attachments

The EPA commented that the exemption for stationary gasoline dispensing tanks for farm operations
should be removed from the rule.
Response #1: Section 103.4 (Exemptions-Stationary Gasoline Dispensing Tanks For Farm Operations)
Based upon information provided by the Arizona Farm Bureau, annual gasoline throughput has been
estimated to be 180,000 gallons per year (i.e., 150 250-gallon tanks with 100 gallons per month
throughput). A loading loss emission factor of 0.909 lbs VOC/1000 gallons was calculated using the
equation provided in Section 5.2.2.1.1 of AP-42. In addition, a breathing and emptying emission factor of
1.0 lbs VOC/1000 gallons was obtained from Table 5.2-7 of AP-42. Combining these two emission factors
with the annual gasoline throughput of the agricultural tanks results in annual VOC emissions of 344
lbs/year (or 0.172 tons/year). These data are included in a spreadsheet dated July 3, 2016 named “AST fuel
estimates.xlsx”. The spreadsheet also includes emissions for displacement and spillage; these are Stage II
emission sources which are not covered under Rule 353. Also, the 2014 National Emissions Inventory
(NEI) emissions used for comparison only included Stage I emission sources. Therefore, the displacement
and spillage emissions were excluded from this analysis. For comparison purposes, the Maricopa County
gasoline station VOC emissions (i.e., total Stage I and tank breathing and emptying) are 1,781.6 tons in the
2014 National Emissions Inventory (NEI). Thus, the VOC emissions from the agricultural gasoline tanks
are less than 0.01 percent of the VOC emissions from gasoline stations. Compared to the gasoline station
(and overall inventory) VOC emissions, VOC emissions from the agricultural gasoline tanks are negligible.
The VOC emissions from the agricultural gasoline tanks are 0.0005% of the annual VOC emissions for all
area sources in Maricopa County per the draft 2014 Periodic Emissions Inventory For Ozone Precursors.
Comment #2: Section 501(Determining Vapor Tight Status)
APS commented that it is unclear whether monitoring requirements found in Section 501 are required to be
completed by the owner/operator and if so, how frequently.
Response #2: Section 501 (Determining Vapor Tight Status)
Sections 303.1 and Section 303.2 (Standards-Gasoline Storage Equipment And Operation Requirements)
both include provisions for the storage tanks to be maintained to prevent vapors from escaping into the
atmosphere. Section 401 (Administrative Requirements-Inspections) addresses the inspections and
frequency of such inspections. Section 503 (Gasoline Dispensing Facility Recordkeeping) addresses the
recordkeeping requirements for the inspection records. The purpose of Section 501 as proposed in Rule 353
is to provide easy methods for owners, operators and the Control Officer to quickly identify if a component
is leaking vapors into the atmosphere. A component may be leaking vapors into the atmosphere but still be
considered “vapor tight” per the definition in Section 200 of the rule. For a component to be vapor tight,
by definition, the component cannot “leak” 10,000 ppmv or more than 1/5 the lower explosive level of
vapor. Basically, a component may have a vapor leak and still be considered vapor tight. Providing
additional methods for the identification of any type of vapor leak (the optical gas imaging and the soapy
solution spray) allows for the quick identification and location of a vapor leak without the expense and time
it takes to calibrate and check for leaks using a combustible gas detector (CGD) or organic vapor analyzer
(OVA). If the optical gas imaging or soapy water methods do not identify any potential “vapor leaks” there
is no need to check for leaks using an CGD or OVA, but the option is still is available. To determine the
“vapor tight” status of a component, a CGD, OVA, or a calibrated optical gas imaging device operated by a
certified operator can be used to identify how much vapor is escaping, answering the question if the
component is vapor tight. The proposed title of Section 501 “Monitoring for Leaks” is somewhat
misleading and implies that one is required to check for leaks using at least one of the three vapor leak
detection procedures listed in the rule, thus APS’s question/comment. To clarify the intent Section 501 to
apply to the determination of a vapor tight status, the department is proposing an introductory statement in
Section 501 to read: “If a determination of vapor tight status is to be made on a VR System or spill
containment equipment at a stationary gasoline dispensing facility or on a gasoline cargo tank, an owner or
operator or Control Officer shall use one or more of the methods listed in Section 501 of this rule”.
Changing the wording from “Monitoring for Leaks” to “Determining Vapor Tight Status” clarifies the
intent of the section. The department believes the phrase “If a determination of vapor tight status is to be
made…” sets the parameters as to when a vapor tight status is to be determined. Through the required
periodic inspections and recordkeeping requirements specified in Sections 401 and 503, the owner or
operator will be able to identify any leaks, both liquid and vapor, in a timely manner to prevent gasoline

vapors from escaping. If there is a question as to how much a component is leaking, at that time a
determination of the vapor tight status should be made. If the component is leaking vapors that are above
the limits identified in the definition of “Vapor Tight” then the component is not vapor tight. If a
component is leaking vapors but is under the limits specified in the definition, then the component does
have a vapor leak but is considered vapor tight.
14. Any other matters prescribed by the statute that are applicable to the specific department or to any
specific rule or class of rules:
Not applicable
15. Incorporations by reference and their location in the rule:
The following EPA Test Method is incorporated by reference in Rule 353, Section 504:
• EPA Methods 2a (“Direct Measurement of Gas Volume Through Pipes and Small Ducts”), and 2b
(“Determination of Exhaust-Gas Volume Flow-Rate from Gasoline Vapor Incinerators“). 40 CFR 60,
Appendix A
• EPA Method 25 (“Determination of Total Gaseous Nonmethane Organic Emissions as Carbon”) and
its submethods (40 CFR 60, Appendix A)
• EPA Method 27 (“Determination of Vapor Tightness of Gasoline Delivery Tank Using Pressure-
Vacuum Test”) in 40 CFR 60, Appendix A
• Alternative Work Practice for Monitoring Equipment Leaks, 40 CFR 60.18(g). An owner or operator
may use an optical gas imaging instrument instead of a 40 CFR part 60, Appendix A-7, Method 21to
monitor for equipment volatile organic compound leaks
• ASTM D323-15a “Standard Test Method for Vapor Pressure of Petroleum Products (Reid Method)
• ASTM D4953-15 “Standard Test Method for Vapor Pressure of Gasoline and Gasoline-Oxygenate
Blends (Dry Method)
• San Diego County Air Pollution Control District Test Procedure TP-96-1, March 1996, Third
Revision, Air Pollution Control District, 9150 Chesapeake Drive, San Diego, CA 92123-1096
• California Environmental Protection Agency, Air Resources Board Vapor Recovery Test Procedure
TP-201.1B, Static Torque of Rotatable Phase 1 Adaptors
• California Air Resources Board Vapor Recovery Test Procedure TP-201.1,—Volumetric Efficiency
for Phase I Vapor Recovery Systems, adopted April 12, 1996, and amended February 1, 2001, and
October 8, 2003
• CARB Test Procedure TP-201.1A - “Determination of Efficiency of Phase I Vapor Recovery Systems
of Dispensing Facilities with Assist Processors”
• California Environmental Protection Agency, Air Resources Board Vapor Recovery Test Procedure
TP-201.1E, Leak Rate and Cracking Pressure of Pressure/Vacuum Vent Valves
• California Environmental Protection Agency, Air Resources Board Vapor Recovery Test Procedure
TP-201.1C, Leak Rate of Drop Tube/Drain Valve Assembly
• California Environmental Protection Agency, Air Resources Board Vapor Recovery Test Procedure
TP-201.1D, Leak Rate of Drop Tube Overfill Protection Devices and Spill Container Drain Valves
• California Air Resources Board Vapor Recovery Test Procedure TP-201.3,—Determination of 2-Inch
WC Static Pressure Performance of Vapor Recovery Systems of Dispensing Facilities
• Bay Area Air Quality Management District Source Test Procedure ST-30—Static Pressure Integrity
Test—Underground Storage Tanks
16. Was this rule previously an emergency rule?
No

17. Full text of the rule follows: Return to list of attachments
MARICOPA COUNTY
AIR POLLUTION CONTROL REGULATIONS
REGULATION III – CONTROL OF AIR CONTAMINANTS
RULE 353
STORAGE AND LOADING OF GASOLINE IN STATIONARY DISPENSING TANKS AT GASOLINE
DISPENSING FACILITIES
INDEX
SECTION 100 – GENERAL
101 PURPOSE
102 APPLICABILITY
103 EXEMPTIONS
SECTION 200 – DEFINITIONS
201 AVIATION GASOLINE (AVGAS)
201 202 CARB-CERTIFIED
202 DISPENSING TANK
203 COAXIAL VAPOR BALANCE SYSTEM
204 DUAL-POINT VAPOR BALANCE SYSTEM
203 205 EXCESS GASOLINE DRAINAGE
204 206 GASOLINE
205 GASOLINE DELIVERY VESSEL
207 GASOLINE CARGO TANK
206 GASOLINE DISPENSING OPERATION
208 GASOLINE DISPENSING FACILITY (GDF)
207 209 GASOLINE VAPORS
208 INSTALLER
209 210 LEAK-FREE
211 MARICOPA COUNTY (MC) VAPOR TIGHTNESS TEST
210 OFFSET FILL LINE
211 212 POPPETTED DRY BREAK
213 PURGING
212 SIDE FILL PIPE
213 214 STAGE 1 VAPOR RECOVERY SYSTEM (VR SYSTEM)
215 STATIONARY GASOLINE DISPENSING TANK
216 SUBMERGED FILL
214 217 TANK CAPACITY
215 TOP FILL OR VERTICAL FILL PIPE

216 218 VAPOR LOSS CONTROL DEVICE EQUIPMENT
217 219 VAPOR TIGHT
SECTION 300 – STANDARDS
301 BASIC TANK INTEGRITY
302 FILL PIPE REQUIREMENTS
303 VAPOR RECOVERY SYSTEM
304 EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE AND USE REQUIRED
305 EXEMPTIONS
301 MANUFACTURERS, SUPPLIERS AND OWNER OR OPERATOR
302 GENERAL HOUSEKEEPING REQUIREMENTS
303 GASOLINE STORAGE EQUIPMENT AND OPERATION REQUIREMENTS
304 LOADING OF GASOLINE
305 CONTROL OF VOC VAPORS
SECTION 400 – ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS
401 TANKS THAT LOST THEIR EXEMPTION
402 401 BURDEN OF PROOF
403 402 CARB DECERTIFICATION
404 403 OTHER AGENCIES’ REQUIREMENTS
SECTION 500 – MONITORING AND RECORDS
501 COMPLIANCE INSPECTIONS
502 RECORDKEEPING
501 DETERMINING VAPOR TIGHT STATUS
502 COMPLIANCE INSPECTIONS
503 GDF RECORDKEEPING
503 504 COMPLIANCE DETERMINATION
504 505 TEST METHODS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE
Revised 07/13/88
Revised 04/06/92
Revised 06/16/99
Revised 09/25/13
Revised 07/13/1988; Revised 04/06/1992; Revised 06/16/1999; Revised 09/25/2013; and Revised MM/DD/YYYY
MARICOPA COUNTY
AIR POLLUTION CONTROL REGULATIONS
REGULATION III – CONTROL OF AIR CONTAMINANTS
RULE 353
STORAGE AND LOADING OF GASOLINE IN STATIONARY DISPENSING TANKS AT GASOLINE
DISPENSING FACILITIES

SECTION 100 – GENERAL
101 PURPOSE: To limit VOC (volatile organic compound) emissions of volatile organic compounds
(VOCs) from gasoline stored in stationary dispensing tanks and from gasoline delivered into such
tanks. during storage and loading of gasoline at gasoline dispensing facilities.
102 APPLICABILITY: This rule applies to an owner or operator who operates a is applicable to gasoline
stored in or transferred into any stationary dispensing tank with a capacity of more than 250 gallons (946 l).
This includes gas stations and other gasoline dispensing facility (GDF) at which gasoline is stored in and
loaded into stationary gasoline dispensing tanks with a capacity of more than 250 gallons (946 l), including
those located at airports.
103 EXEMPTIONS:
103.1 This rule does not apply to the storage and loading of the following fuels:
a. Diesel.
b. Liquefied petroleum gas (LPG).
103.2 Aviation Gasoline Loaded At Airports: The loading of aviation gasoline into stationary storage
tanks at airports, and the subsequent loading of aviation gasoline within the airport, is exempt
from Section 304 and Section 305.1 of this rule. The storage of aviation gas at airports is subject
to this rule.
103.3 Bulk Gasoline Plant Or Bulk Gasoline Terminal: This rule does not apply to a bulk gasoline
plant or a bulk gasoline terminal as defined in Rule 351 of these rules.
103.4 Stationary Gasoline Dispensing Tanks For Farm Operations: Any stationary gasoline
dispensing tank used exclusively for the fueling of implements of normal farm operations must
comply with Section 302 (General Housekeeping Requirements), but is exempt from all other
requirements of this rule.
103.5 Stage 1 Vapor Recovery System (VR System): The VR System provisions of Section 305 of this
rule shall not apply to the following stationary gasoline dispensing tanks:
a. Non-Resale Gasoline Dispensing Faicilities: Any stationary GDF receiving less than 120,000
gallons (454,250 l) of gasoline in any twelve (12) consecutive calendar months, dispensing no
resold gasoline, and having each stationary gasoline dispensing tank equipped with a
permanent submerged fill pipe, is exempt from Section 305 of this rule. A facility shall
become subject to the provisions of Section 305 of this rule by exceeding the 120,000 gallon
(454,250 l) threshold and shall remain subject to such provisions even if annual amount of
gasoline received later falls below this threshold.
b. Stationary Gasoline Dispensing Tanks Of 1000 Gallons (3785 l) Or Less: Any stationary
gasoline dispensing tank having a capacity of 1000 gallons (3785 l) or less which was
installed prior to October 2, 1978, provided that such tank is equipped with a permanent
submerged fill pipe is exempt from Section 305 of this rule. Where, because of government
regulation including, but not limited to, Fire Department codes, such a fill pipe cannot be
installed, the gasoline shall be delivered into the tank using a nozzle extension that reaches
within six (6) inches (15.24 cm) of the tank bottom.
103.6 Loading Of Gasoline: The owner or operator of a stationary GDF that is unattended or when
there is only one owner or operator under control of the stationary GDF present, the owner or
operator of the stationary GDF is exempt from Section 304 of this rule.
SECTION 200 – DEFINITIONS: For the purpose of this rule, the following definitions shall apply, in addition to
those definitions found in Rule 100 (General Provisions and Definitions) of these rules. In the event of any
inconsistency between any of the Maricopa County air pollution control rules, the definitions in this rule take
precedence.
201 AVIATION GASOLINE (AVGAS): A type of gasoline used to fuel a piston engine aircraft.

201 202 CARB-CERTIFIED: A vapor control system, subsystem, or component that has been specifically
approved by system configuration and manufacturer’s name and model number in an executive order of the
California Air Resources Board (CARB), pursuant to Section 41954 of the California Health and Safety
Code. Such orders are included in CARB’s publication, “Gasoline Facilities - Phase I & II”, which is
available as set forth in subsection 503.4.
203 COAXIAL VAPOR BALANCE SYSTEM: A type of vapor balance system in which the gasoline vapors
are removed through the same opening through which the fuel is delivered.
202 DISPENSING TANK: Any stationary tank which dispenses gasoline into a motorized vehicle’s fuel tank
that directly fuels its engine(s). This includes aircraft.
204 DUAL-POINT VAPOR BALANCE SYSTEM: A type of vapor balance system in which the storage tank
is equipped with an entry port for a gasoline fill pipe and a separate exit port for a vapor connection.
203 205 EXCESS GASOLINE DRAINAGE: More than 10 milliliters (2 teaspoonsful) of liquid gasoline lost from
the end of a fill hose or vapor hose in the process of connecting or disconnecting the hose; or any quantity
of gasoline escaping out the end of such a hose that wets any area(s) on the ground having an aggregate
area greater than 113 square inches, or the perimeter of which would encompass a circle of 12 inches (30.5
cm) diameter. This does not include drainage into a fill tube’s pipe’s spill containment receptacle.
204 206 GASOLINE: Any petroleum distillate or blend of petroleum distillate with other combustible liquid(s),
such as alcohol, that, petroleum distillate/alcohol blend, petroleum distillate/organic compound blend, or
alcohol having a Reid vapor pressure between 4.0 and 14.7 psi (200–760 mm Hg.), as determined by
Section 504.2 of this rule, and which is used as a fuel for internal combustion engines. and has a vapor
pressure between 4.0 and 14.7 psi (200–760 mm Hg.), as determined by the applicable method pursuant to
subsections 503.2 and 504.2. For the purposes of this rule, liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) is excluded.
205 GASOLINE DELIVERY VESSEL: Any vehicular-mounted container such as a tanker truck, tank trailer,
cargo tank or any other wheel-mounted container used to transport gasoline. This includes any hoses the
vessel carries through which deliveries must be made.
207 GASOLINE CARGO TANK: A delivery tank truck or railcar which is loading or unloading gasoline, or
which has loaded or unloaded gasoline on the immediately previous load. This includes any hoses the
vessel carries through which deliveries must be made.
206 GASOLINE DISPENSING OPERATION : All gasoline dispensing tanks and associated equipment located
on one or more contiguous or adjacent properties under the control of the same person (or persons under
common control).
208 GASOLINE DISPENSING FACILITY (GDF): Any stationary facility which dispenses gasoline into the
fuel tank of a motor vehicle, motor vehicle engine, nonroad vehicle, or nonroad engine, including a
nonroad vehicle or nonroad engine used solely for competition. These facilities include, but are not limited
to, facilities that dispense gasoline into on- and off-road, street, or highway motor vehicles, lawn
equipment, boats, test engines, landscaping equipment, generators, pumps, and other gasoline fueled
engines and equipment.
207 209 GASOLINE VAPORS: Vapors, originating from liquid gasoline, that are usually found in mixture with
air. Included are any droplets of liquid gasoline or of gasoline vapor condensate that are entrained by the
vapor.
208 INSTALLER: The person, as defined in Rule 100, that installs VOC control equipment at a dispensing
facility.
209 210 LEAK-FREE: A condition in which there is no liquid gasoline escape or seepage of more than 3 drops per
minute from gasoline storage, handling, and ancillary equipment, including, but not limited to, seepage and
escapes from above ground fittings.
211 MARICOPA COUNTY (MC) VAPOR TIGHTNESS TEST: The complete pressure, vacuum, and
vapor-valve testing of a gasoline cargo tank that is performed according to Maricopa County specifications
as described in Rule 352 of these rules.

210 OFFSET FILL LINE: Any dispensing tank’s gasoline fill line (piping and fittings) which contains one or
more bends.
211 212 POPPETTED DRY BREAK: A Stage 1 vapor recovery device A type of vapor loss control equipment
that opens only by connection to a mating device to ensure that no gasoline vapors escape from
the stationary gasoline dispensing tank before the vapor return recovery line is connected.
213 PURGING: Removing, cleaning, or scouring out gasoline vapors from all or a portion of a gasoline cargo
tank by active or passive means and emitting the vapors into the atmosphere.
212 SIDE FILL PIPE: A fill pipe that enters a dispensing tank through the tank’s side.
213 214 STAGE 1 VAPOR RECOVERY SYSTEM (VR SYSTEM): At a gasoline dispensing facility stationary
GDF, the use of installed vapor recovery equipment designed to reduce by at least 90% 95% the VOC
vapor that would otherwise be displaced into the atmosphere from a stationary gasoline dispensing tank
when gasoline is delivered into the tank by a delivery vessel gasoline cargo tank. This reduction may be
done either by capturing the displaced vapors within the delivery vessel gasoline cargo tank, and or by
processing the vapors on site with an emission processing device. (such as a VOC oxidizer).
215 STATIONARY GASOLINE DISPENSING TANK: Any stationary tank which dispenses gasoline
directly into a motorized vehicle’s fuel tank, dispenses gasoline into an aircraft’s fuel tank, or dispenses
gasoline into a watercraft’s fuel tank that directly fuels its engine(s).
216 SUBMERGED FILL: Any discharge pipe or nozzle which meets the applicable specification as follows:
216.1 Top-Fill or Bottom-Fill: The end of the discharge pipe or nozzle is totally submerged when the
liquid level is six (6) inches (15 cm) from the bottom of the tank.
216.2 Side-Fill: At its highest point within the stationary gasoline dispensing tank less 2,000,000 gallon
capacity, the end of the discharge pipe or nozzle is totally submerged when the liquid level is
eighteen (18) inches (46 cm) from the bottom of the tank.
Submerged Fill Diagram
NOT TO SCALE
Top Fill Opening
6” Maximum
Height from bottom
of the tank
Side Fill
Maximum 18” from
bottom of the tank
Bottom Fill
Minimum 6”
of liquid
214 217 TANK CAPACITY: The maximum volume of liquid gasoline a particular tank is allowed to store while
still complying with all applicable rules, including local, state, and Federal rules.
215 TOP FILL OR VERTICAL FILL PIPE: A fill pipe that enters a dispensing tank through its top.
216 218 VAPOR LOSS CONTROL DEVICE EQUIPMENT: Any piping, hoses, equipment, or devices which
are used to collect, store and/or process VOC vapors at a service station or other gasoline
dispensing operation. facility.

217 219 VAPOR TIGHT: A condition in which an organic vapor analyzer (OVA) or a combustible gas detector
(CGD) at a potential VOC leak source shows either less than 10,000 ppm when calibrated with methane, or
less than 1/5 of the lower explosive limit, when prepared according to the manufacturer and used according
to subsection 504.3 of this rule. A condition in which a suitable detector at the site of (potential) leakage of
vapor shows less than 10,000 ppmv when calibrated with methane or the detector shows less than 1/5 lower
explosive limit (LEL) when calibrated with a gas specified by the manufacturer and used according to the
manufacturer’s instructions.
SECTION 300 – STANDARDS–VAPOR LOSS CONTROL MEASURES REQUIRED: No person shall transfer or
permit the transfer of gasoline from any delivery vessel into any stationary dispensing tank located above or below
ground with a capacity of more than 250 gallons (946 l) unless the following conditions are met:
301 BASIC TANK INTEGRITY: No vapor or liquid escapes are allowed through a dispensing tank’s outer
surfaces, nor from any of the joints where the tank is connected to pipe(s), wires, or other system.
301.1 VOC Emission Standard:
a. Gasoline delivery operations shall be vapor-tight, as defined in Section 218, except for tanks
exempted by Section 305 from Stage 1 vapor recovery requirements.
b. Tanks and their fittings shall be vapor-tight except for the outlet of a pressure/vacuum relief
valve on a dispensing tank’s vent pipe. Specifically, this means that at a probe tip distance of
1 inch (2.5 cm) from a surface, no vapor escape shall exceed 1/5 of the lower explosive limit.
This applies to tanks containing gasoline regardless of whether they are currently being filled,
and to caps and other tank fittings.
301.2 Leakage Limits–Liquid Leaks and Spills:
a. Gasoline storage and receiving operations shall be leak-free. Specifically, no liquid gasoline
escape of more than 3 drops per minute is allowed. This includes leaks through the walls of
piping, fittings, fill hose(s), and vapor hose(s).
b. There shall be no excess gasoline drainage from the end of a fill hose or a vapor hose.
Specifically, not more than 2 teaspoonsful of gasoline shall be lost in the course of a connect
or disconnect process.
301.3 Spill Containment Equipment: The entire spill containment system including gaskets shall be kept
vapor-tight.
a. The Spill Containment Receptacle:
(1) The outer surface of the spill containment receptacle shall have no holes or cracks and
shall allow no vapors to pass from the dispensing tank through it to the atmosphere.
(2) Spill containment receptacles shall be kept clean and free of foreign material at all times.
(3) Spill containment receptacles shall be inspected at least weekly. Records of inspection
and cleaning shall be kept according to subsection 502.2.
b. If the spill containment is equipped with a passageway to allow material trapped by the
containment system to flow into the interior of the dispensing tank:
(1) The passageway shall be kept vapor-tight at all times, except during the short period
when a person opens the passageway to immediately drain material trapped by the
containment system into the tank.
(2) The bottom of the receptacle shall be designed and kept such that no puddles of gasoline
are left after draining through the passageway has ceased.
c. The dispensing tank owner/operator is responsible for assuring that before a delivery vessel
leaves the premises after a delivery:
(1) Any gasoline in a dispensing tank’s spill containment receptacle has been removed.

(2) Any gasoline that a person has taken out of a spill receptacle, as a free liquid or as
absorbed into/onto other material removed from the receptacle, shall be contained in such
a way that VOC emission is prevented; disposal in conformance with applicable
hazardous waste rules is sufficient to meet this requirement.
(3) Any plunger/stopper assembly is unimpeded and sealing correctly.
d. Criteria Of Violation/Exceedance for Spill-Containment Receptacles: A reading on a CGD or
OVA exceeding 1/5 LEL (10,000 ppm as methane) is an exceedance. The procedure for
performing a determination is set forth in subsection 504.3.
302 FILL PIPE REQUIREMENTS:
302.1 Each fill-line into a stationary dispensing tank shall be equipped with a permanent submerged fill
pipe that has a discharge opening which is completely submerged when the liquid level is 6 inches
above the tank bottom.
a. Threads, gaskets, and mating surfaces of the fill pipe assembly shall be designed and
maintained tight. There shall be no liquid or vapor leakage at the joints of the assembly.
b. An owner/operator is responsible to assure that external fittings of a fill pipe assembly shall
be inspected weekly to assure that cap, gasket, and piping are intact and are not loose.
(1) A record of the inspection shall be made according to subsection 502.2.
(2) An owner/operator shall act to prevent driver/deliverers from connecting the delivery
hose coupling to a fill pipe coupling with so much twisting force that the fill pipe
assembly is loosened. One method of complying is to have a CARB-certified swivel
coupling as part of the fill pipe assembly (reference subsection 503.4 for CARB).
302.2 Fill Pipe Caps:
a. The cap shall have a securely attached, intact gasket.
b. The cap and its gasket shall always function properly, latch completely so that it cannot then
be easily twisted by hand, and have no structural defects.
c. The cap of a gasoline fill pipe shall always be fastened securely on the fill pipe except
immediately before, during, and immediately after:
(1) “Sticking” the tank to measure gasoline depth.
(2) Delivering gasoline into the tank.
(3) Doing testing, maintenance or inspection on the gasoline/vapor system.
d. Do not unfasten or remove a fill pipe cap unless every other fill pipe is either securely capped
or connected to a delivery hose, except as otherwise needed for testing, maintenance, or
inspection.
302.3 Restrictions on Multiple Fill Pipes:
a. A tank installed after December 31, 1998, shall not be equipped with more than one fill pipe
unless more than one fill pipe is specifically allowed in the Air Pollution Permit and there is a
2-point system having a properly installed vapor return pipe close to each fill pipe.
b. Restriction on Concurrent Delivery: An owner/operator of a dispensing tank fitted with more
than 1 fill pipe shall prevent concurrent delivery of gasoline by a gasoline delivery vessel to
more than 1 fill pipe of the tank by locking additional fill pipes shut or by using other
permanent means, unless:
(1) Concurrent delivery is specifically allowed in the facility’s Air Pollution Permit; and
(2) All fill pipes in use are part of a 2-point vapor recovery system; and

(3) Before making a concurrent delivery through a tank’s second fill pipe, an additional
vapor return hose from the delivery vessel must first be attached to the vapor return line
associated with the second fill pipe.
302.4 Fill Pipe Obstructions:
a. Any type of screen and/or other obstructions in fill pipe assemblies shall be permanently
removed by November 1, 1999, unless it is specifically allowed by an Air Pollution Permit or
is CARB-certified, as referenced in subsection 503.4.
b. A screen or other obstruction, allowed by Air Pollution Permit or CARB, shall be temporarily
removed by the owner/operator of a dispensing tank prior to inspection by the Control Officer
to allow measurements pursuant to this rule.
302.5 Overfill Protection Equipment: Overfill prevention equipment shall be vapor-tight to the
atmosphere. Any device mounted within the fill pipe shall be so designed and maintained that no
vapor from the vapor space above the gasoline within the tank can penetrate into the fill pipe or
through any of the fill pipe assembly into the atmosphere.
303 VAPOR RECOVERY SYSTEM:
303.1 Gasoline vapors displaced from a dispensing tank by gasoline being delivered shall be handled by
a Stage Vapor Recovery System, unless the tank is exempted by Section 305.
303.2 Stage 1 Vapor-Recovery System Configuration (Reference subsection 503.4 for identification of
CARB-certified components):
a. Replacement: After June 16, 1999, no part of a vapor recovery system for which there is a
CARB specification shall be replaced with anything but CARB-certified components.
b. Vapor Valves:
(1) All vapor return lines from dispensing tanks shall be equipped with CARB-certified,
spring-loaded, vapor-tight, poppetted dry break valves.
(2) Vapor valves shall be inspected weekly to determine if closure is complete and gaskets
are intact; a record shall be made pursuant to subsection 502.2.
c. Above Ground Systems: After June 16, 1999, an above ground dispensing tank shall have
CARB-certified fittings wherever CARB so specifies.
d. New Systems: Each new gasoline tank installation shall use CARB-certified fittings
exclusively wherever CARB so specifies, and:
(1) Shall have its own separate, functioning 2-point vapor return line;
(2) Is allowed to have a combination vapor recovery system that in addition to having a
separate 2-point Stage 1 vapor return line, also has stage 1 vapor piping/fittings linking it
to one or more (other) gasoline dispensing tanks.
e. New Coaxial Prohibited:
(1) No coaxial fill pipes shall be installed after June 16, 1999, in new installations; and
(2) No coaxial fill pipes shall be reinstalled after June 16, 1999, in major modifications in
which the top of the tank is exposed and the vapor port bung is pre-configured to accept
vapor recovery piping.
304 EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE AND USE REQUIRED: All vapor loss control equipment shall be
installed as required, operated as recommended by the manufacturer, and maintained leak-free, vapor-tight
and in good working order.
304.1 Both the owner/operator of a dispensing tank and the driver/operator of a delivery vessel
delivering gasoline to the fuel dispensing tank equipped with vapor recovery shall have

responsibility to assure that vapor recovery equipment (if required by this rule) is properly
connected and in use at all times while gasoline is actively being dropped/delivered.
304.2 The owner/operator of a fuel dispensing tank not exempted by Section 305 shall refuse delivery of
gasoline from a delivery vessel which does not bear a current pressure test certification decal
issued by the Control Officer. This provision does not apply during times when the facility is
unattended or there is only one person under control of the dispensing facility present.
304.3 Coaxial Systems: Both spring-loaded and fixed coaxial fill tubes shall be maintained according to
the standards of their manufacturer(s) and be operated so that there is no obstruction of vapor
passage from the tank to the delivery vessel.
305 EXEMPTIONS:
305.1 Dispensing Tanks for Farm Operations: Any stationary gasoline dispensing tank used exclusively
for the fueling of implements of normal farm operations is exempt from this rule, except for cap,
spills, and liquid leak-age provisions in Section 301.
305.2 The Vapor Recovery Provisions of Section 303 of this Rule Shall Not Apply to the Following
Stationary Gasoline Dispensing Tanks:
a. Non-Resale Dispensing Operations From Non-Farm Tanks: Any stationary gasoline
dispensing operation receiving less than 120,000 gallons of gasoline in any 12 consecutive
calendar months, dispensing no resold gasoline, and having each gasoline dispensing tank
equipped with a permanent submerged fill pipe pursuant to subsection 302.1, is exempt from
Section 303. However, any operation shall become subject to the provisions of Section 303 of
this rule by exceeding the 120,000 gallon threshold or not abiding by the restrictions, and
shall remain subject to such provisions even if annual emissions later fall below this
threshold.
b. Dispensing Tanks Of 1000 Gallons Or Less: Any stationary dispensing tank having a capacity
of 1000 gallons (3785 l) or less which was installed prior to October 2, 1978, provided that
such tank is equipped with a permanent submerged fill pipe. Where, because of government
regulation including, but not limited to, Fire Department codes, such a fill pipe cannot be
installed, the gasoline shall be delivered into the tank using a nozzle extension that reaches
within 6 inches of the tank bottom.
c. Dispensing Tanks with Offset Fill Lines: Any stationary dispensing tank installed prior to
October 2, 1978, where the fill line between the fill connection and tank is offset.
SECTION 300 – STANDARDS
301 MANUFACTURERS, SUPPLIERS, AND OWNER OR OPERATOR:
301.1 A manufacturer, supplier, owner or operator shall not supply, offer for sale, sell, install or allow
the installation of an above ground or underground storage tank, any type of VR System or any of
its components unless the tank, system and components meet the following:
a. Replacement Components For A VR System: After June 16, 1999, a VR System for which
there is a CARB specification shall be replaced with components that comply with one of the
following:
(1) The equipment is supplied by the manufacturer as a CARB-certified component; or
(2) The equipment is rebuilt by a person who is authorized by CARB to rebuild that specific
CARB-certified component; or
b. All vapor recovery lines from stationary gasoline dispensing tanks shall be equipped with
CARB-certified, spring-loaded, vapor tight, poppetted dry breaks.
c. After [Date of Rule Adoption], each new or rebuilt installed component shall be clearly
identified with a permanent identification affixed by the certified manufacturer or rebuilder.

301.2 Only a State of Arizona licensed Vapor Recovery Registered Service Representative (RSR) shall
install an above ground or underground storage tank or vapor recovery system components.
301.3 An owner or operator shall not:
a. Install a coaxial fill pipe in a new installation (after June 16, 1999); or
b. Reinstall a coaxial fill pipe during any changes to the stationary gasoline dispensing tank
when the top of the tank is exposed and the vapor port bung is pre-configured to accept vapor
recovery piping.
301.4 The owner or operator of a stationary gaoline dispensing tank shall verify that vapor recovery
equipment (unless exempted by this rule) is properly connected and in use at all times while
gasoline is actively being loaded. If the stationary GDF is unattended or there is only one owner or
operator under control of the stationary GDF on-site, the owner or operator of the gasoline cargo
tank is responsible for the proper connection and use of the vapor recovery equipment (unless
exempted by this rule) while gasoline is being actively loaded.
301.5 An owner or operator shall only load, allow the loading, or provide equipment for the loading of
gasoline from only a gasoline cargo tank identified with a valid Maricopa County (MC) Vapor
Tightness Test decal into any stationary gasoline storage tank.
302 GENERAL HOUSEKEEPING REQUIREMENTS: An owner or operator shall not store gasoline or
permit the loading of gasoline in any stationary gasoline dispensing tank located above or below ground
unless all of the following conditions are met:
302.1. Minimize gasoline spills;
302.2 Clean up spills as expeditiously as practicable;
302.3 Cover all open gasoline containers and all gasoline storage tank fill-pipes with a gasketed seal
when not in use;
302.4 Minimize gasoline sent to waste collection systems that collect and transport gasoline to
reclamation and recycling equipment, such as oil/water separators;
302.5 Properly dispose of any VOC containing material.
303 GASOLINE STORAGE EQUIPMENT AND OPERATION REQUIREMENTS:
303.1 Underground Storage Tank (UST): By [Date of Rule Adoption+30 Days], an UST with a
capacity more than 250 gallons (946 l) must meet all of the following conditions unless exempt
from the VR System requirements per Section 103.5 of this rule:
a. The UST is equipped and maintained according to Section 301 of this rule;
b. For an existing stationary GDF, maintain a dual-point VR System or a coaxial vapor balance
system. For new installations (after June 16, 1999) or modifications to an existing stationary
GDF (after June 16, 1999), install and maintain a dual-point vapor balance system with
separate fill and vapor connection points;
c. A pressure-vacuum vent is installed and maintained per manufacturer’s specifications;
d. The VR System is maintained and operated according to the manufacturer's specifications and
the applicable CARB Executive Orders including the corresponding CARB approved
Installation, Operation and Maintenance Manual;
e. A permanent submerged fill pipe is installed and maintained to ensure the highest point of the
discharge opening is no more than six inches (6”) from the bottom of the UST;
f. Each fill pipe is equipped with gasketed vapor tight cap;
g. After [Date of Rule Adoption+30 days] each poppetted dry break is equipped with vapor tight
seal and gasketed vapor tight cap;

h. Each gasketed vapor tight cap is maintained in a closed position except when the fill pipe or
poppetted dry break it serves is actively in use;
i. The fill pipe assembly, including fill pipe, fittings and gaskets, is maintained to prevent vapor
leakage from any portion of the VR System; and
j. A spill containment receptacle is installed and maintained free of standing liquid, debris and
other foreign matter. The spill containment receptacle shall be equipped with an integral drain
valve or other CARB-certified equipment, to return spilled gasoline to the UST. The drain
valve shall be maintained closed and free of vapor emissions at all times except when the
valve is actively in use.
303.2 Above Ground Storage Tank (AST): By [Date of Rule Adoption+30 Days], an AST with a
capacity more than 250 gallons (946 l) must meet all of the following conditions:
a. A permanent submerged fill pipe is installed and maintained to ensure the highest point of the
discharge opening is no more than six inches (6”) from the bottom of the AST. If the AST is
side filled, the fill pipe discharge opening is no more than 18 inches (18”) above the tank
bottom;
b. A pressure-vacuum vent is installed and maintained per manufacturer’s specifications;
c. Each fill pipe is equipped with a gasketed vapor tight cap;
d. All threads, gaskets, and mating surfaces of the fill pipe assembly shall prevent liquid or
vapor leakage at the joints of the assembly;
e. Each gasketed vapor tight cap is maintained in a closed position except when actively in use;
f. Prior to [Date of Rule Adoption], if an AST is equipped with a spill containment receptacle, it
shall be maintained to be free of standing liquid, debris and other foreign matter. After [Date
of Rule Adoption+30 Days], a newly installed AST shall be equipped with a spill containment
receptacle that is maintained to be free of standing liquid, debris and other foreign matter;
g. A spill containment receptacle is installed at each fill pipe; and
h. Any overfill prevention equipment shall be approved, installed and maintained vapor tight to
the atmosphere. Any device mounted within the fill pipe shall be so designed and maintained
that no vapor from the vapor space above the gasoline within the tank can penetrate into the
fill pipe or through any of the fill pipe assembly into the atmosphere.
304 LOADING OF GASOLINE: Prior to accepting a load of gasoline, an owner or operator of a stationary
GDF shall verify all of the following unless exempted in Section 103 of this rule:
304.1 The gasoline cargo tank clearly displays a valid Maricopa County Vapor Tightness Certification
decal that is permanently mounted near the front on the right (passenger) side of the vessel.
304.2 The owner or operator of the gasoline cargo tank connects the vapor recovery hose prior to
connecting loading hose.
305 CONTROL OF VOC VAPORS:
305.1 Gasoline vapors displaced from a stationary gasoline dispensing tank while being loaded shall be
handled by a VR System, unless the tank is exempted by Section 103.5 of this rule.
305.2 VR System Configuration:
a. Replacement: After June 16, 1999, no part of a VR System for which there is a CARB
specification shall be replaced with anything but CARB-certified components.
b. Vapor Valves:
(1) All vapor recovery lines from a stationary gasoline dispensing tank shall be equipped
with CARB-certified, spring-loaded, vapor-tight, poppetted dry breaks.

(2) Vapor valves shall be inspected pursuant to Section 401 of this rule to determine if
closure is complete and gaskets are intact; a record shall be made pursuant to Section 502
of this rule.
c. AST: After June 16, 1999, an AST shall have CARB-certified fittings wherever CARB so
specifies.
d. By [Date of Rule Adoption+30 Days], each AST and UST shall use CARB-certified fittings
exclusively wherever CARB so specifies, and:
(1) Shall have its own separate, functioning dual-point vapor return line;
(2) Is allowed to have a combination vapor recovery system that in addition to having a
separate dual-point vapor recovery line, also has vapor piping/fittings linking it to one or
more (other) stationary gasoline dispensing tanks.
305.3 Equipment Maintenance And Use Required:
a. All vapor loss control equipment shall be:
(1) Installed as required;
(2) Operated as recommended by the manufacturer; and
(3) Maintained leak-free, vapor tight and in good working order.
b. Coaxial Systems: Both spring-loaded and fixed coaxial fill pipes shall be
(1) Maintained according to the standards of their manufacturer(s); and
(2) Be operated so that there is no obstruction of vapor passage from the stationary gasoline
dispensing tank to the gasoline cargo tank.
SECTION 400 – ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS
401 TANKS THAT LOST THEIR EXEMPTION: Tanks that were formerly exempt from a provision prior to
June 16, 1999, shall come into compliance by December 1, 1999.
401 INSPECTIONS: The owner or operator of a GDF shall conduct inspections. A record shall be made
pursuant to Section 503 of this rule.
401.1 The inspection shall include, but is not limited to all of the following:
a. The spill containment receptacle shall be:
(1) Free of cracks, rust and defects;
(2) Free of foreign material;
(3) Empty of liquid, including gasoline;
(4) If necessary, installed with a drain valve that properly seals.
b. The external fittings of the fill pipe assembly shall be:
(1) Intact and not loose;
(2) Covered with a gasketed cap that fits securely onto the fill pipe.
c. The poppetted dry break shall be:
(1) Equipped with a vapor tight seal;
(2) Covered with a gasketed cap that fits securely onto the poppetted dry break.
401.2 The inspections shall be conducted:
a. At least once per calendar week; or

b. If the gasoline dispensing facility receives gasoline loads less than once per calendar week,
the inspection shall take place upon completion of the receipt of the load of gasoline.
402 BURDEN OF PROOF:
402.1 Proving Exempt Status: The burden of proof of eligibility for exemption from a provision of this
rule is on the applicant owner or operator. Persons An owner or operator seeking such an
exemption shall maintain adequate records and furnish them to the Control Officer upon request.
402.2 Providing Proof of Equipment Compliance: a. It is the responsibility of the installer of vapor
control equipment owner or operator, when so required by the Control Officer, to provide proof,
when requested by the Control Officer, that a vapor recovery system or its modifications meet the
requirements of this Rule 353.
b. If the owner/operator or the equipment supplier voluntarily provides such proof, the Control
Officer has the option to waive the subsection 402.2a requirement that the installer provide
this proof.
403 CARB DECERTIFICATION: A person An owner or operator shall not install or reinstall a component
related to vapor recovery that has been decertified by CARB. in “Gasoline Facilities - Phase I & II”
publication, referenced in subsection 503.4.
404 OTHER AGENCIES’ REQUIREMENTS: Compliance with this rule does not relieve or otherwise
affect a person’s the owner or operator’s obligation to comply with any other applicable federal, state, or
local legal requirement, including, but not limited to, rules promulgated by the Arizona Department of
Weights and Measures, Arizona Department of Agriculture, Weights and Measures Services Division; local
fire department codes,; and local zoning ordinances.
SECTION 500 – MONITORING AND RECORDS:
501 DETERMINING VAPOR TIGHT STATUS: An owner or operator or Control Officer shall follow the
test procedure in Section 501.1 of this rule and shall use one or more of the methods listed in Sections
501.2 or 501.3 of this rule to determine the vapor tight status on a VR System or spill containment
equipment at a stationary GDF or on a gasoline cargo tank.
501.1 Combustible Gas Detector (CGD) or Organic Vapor Analyzer (OVA) - Test Procedure: During
loading of gasoline into stationary gasoline dispensing tanks, the peripheries of all potential sources of
leakage during loading at the GDF are checked with a CGD or OVA as follows:
a. Calibration: Within four (4) hours prior to monitoring, the CGD or OVA shall be properly
calibrated for a 20 percent LEL response or to 10,000 ppm with methane.
b. Probe Distance: The probe inlet shall be one (1) inch (2.5 cm) or less from the potential leak
source when searching for leaks. The probe inlet shall be one (1) inch (2.5 cm) from the leak
source when the highest detector reading is being determined for a discovered leak. When the
probe is obstructed from moving within one (1) inch (2.5 cm) of an actual or potential leak
source, the closest practicable probe distance shall be used.
c. Probe Movement: The probe shall be moved slowly, not faster than 1.6 inches per second (4
centimeters per second). If there is any meter deflection at an actual or potential leak source, the
probe shall be positioned to locate the point of highest meter response.
d. Probe Position: The probe inlet shall be positioned in the path of the vapor flow from an actual
or potential leak such that the central axis of the probe-tube inlet shall be positioned coaxiallywith
the path of the most concentrated vapors.
e. Wind: Wind shall be blocked as much as possible from the space being monitored. The annual
leak detection test required by Section 401 of this rule shall be valid only when wind speed in the
space being monitored is five (5) mph or less.
f. Data Recording: The highest detector reading and location for each incidence of detected
leakage shall be recorded, along with the date and time. If no gasoline vapor is detected, that
fact shall be entered into the record.

501.2 Method 21-Determination of Volatile Organic Compound Leaks, Alternative Screening
Procedure 8.3.3:
a. Spray a soap solution over all potential leak sources. The soap solution may be a
commercially available leak detection solution or may be prepared using concentrated
detergent and water. A pressure sprayer or squeeze bottle may be used to dispense the
solution.
b. Observe the potential leak sites to determine if any bubbles are formed.
(1) If no bubbles are observed, the source is presumed to have no detectable vapor leaks.
(2) If any bubbles are observed, the instrument techniques of Section 501.1 of this rule shall
be used to verify if a vapor leak exists.
501.3 Optical Gas Imaging: A certified operator of a calibrated optical gas imaging device may use an
optical gas imaging instrument to identify vapor leaks. If a vapor leak is detected, the instrument
techniques listed in Section 501.1 of this rule shall be used to verify if a vapor leak exists.
501 502 COMPLIANCE INSPECTIONS: Any dispensing tank stationary gasoline dispensing tank required by
this rule to be equipped with vapor loss control devices a VR system may be subject to monitoring for
vapor tightness and liquid leak tightness during any working hours. Such a tank may be opened for gauging
or inspection when loading operations are not in progress, provided that such tank is part of an open system
or is served by a positive-pressure relief valve with a relief setting not exceeding +½ lb psig.
502 503 GDF RECORDKEEPING: The owner or operator of each gasoline dispensing facility stationary GDF in
Maricopa County shall maintain records as follows:
502.1 503.1 The total amount of gasoline received each month shall be recorded by the end of the following
month.
502.2 503.2 The owner or operator of a gasoline dispensing facility stationary GDF shall cause weekly records
of fill tube, vapor valve and spill containment inspection to be kept. The findings of such weekly
inspections shall be permanently entered in a record or log book by the end of Saturday of the
following week . record inspections in a permanent record or log book:
a. By the end of Saturday of the following week; or
b. If the gasoline dispensing facilities receives gasoline loads less than once per calendar week,
the owner or operator shall record the inspection within three days after the receipt of the load
of gasoline.
502.3 503.3 These records and any reports or supporting information required by this rule or by the Control
Officer shall be retained for at least 5 five (5) years.
502.4 503.4 Records of the past 12 twelve (12) months shall be in a readily accessible location and must be
made available to the Control Officer without delay upon verbal or written request.
503 504 COMPLIANCE DETERMINATION: The test methods referenced in Section 503 shall be used in the
ways given in the subsections that immediately follow. When more than one test method is permitted for a
determination, an exceedance of the limits established in this rule determined by any of the applicable test
methods constitutes a violation of this rule. For routine information collection, the Control Officer may
accept a manufacturer’s data sheet (MSDS), data certified by an officer of the supplying company, or test
data for the product of inquiry.
503.1 504.1 Control efficiency of vapor recovery systems loss control equipment and vapor collection/
processing systems shall be determined according to EPA Method 2A and either EPA Method
25A or 25B (Section 504 and subsection 504.1), or by CARB-approved test methods (Section 504
and subsection 504.4). EPA Method 2B shall be used for vapor incineration devices.
503.2 504.2 Vapor pressure of gasoline (reference Section 204) shall be determined using American Society
for Testing and Materials (ASTM) Method D323-94 ASTM D323-15a Standard Test Method for
Vapor Pressure of Petroleum Products (Reid Method) or ASTM Method D4953-93 D4953-15,
Standard Test Method for Vapor Pressure of Gasoline and Gasoline-Oxygenate Blends (Dry

Method). ASTM Method D323-94 D323-15a shall be used for gasoline either containing no
oxygenates or MTBE (methyl tertiary butyl ether) as the sole oxygenate. Method D4953-
93 ASTM 4953-15 shall be used for oxygenated gasoline.
503.3 504.3 Vapor Leaks:
a. If a determination of leak vapor tight status is to be made on Stage 1 a VR system or spill
containment equipment at a gasoline dispensing facility stationary GDF or on a delivery
vessel gasoline cargo tank at the station, the method in subsection 504.3 at least one of the test
method’s listed in Section 501 of this rule shall be used.
b. Subsection 504.3 Section 501.1 of this rule probe distance and movement parameters not
with-standing, if it has been established that there are no other interfering vapor escapes, it is
an exceedance if a reading by the Control Officer from an established vapor escape above 1/5
LEL (or 10,000 ppm as methane) is sustained for at least 5 five (5) seconds, and the probe is
either consistently further than 1 one (1) inch from the source and/or the probe is consistently
being moved faster than 4 cm four centimeters (4 cm) per second.
c. The Control Officer may count it as a failure to perform weekly inspections pursuant
to subsection 301.3 Section 305.2 of this rule if foreign material is found in a spill
containment receptacle and there is no record of an inspection’s being performed in the
preceding 10 ten (10) days.
503.4 The CARB publication, “Gasoline Facilities - Phase I & II”, pursuant to sections 41954 through
41962 of the California Health and Safety Code, is adopted by reference, as it exists on June 16,
1999. This publication is available for reference at the Maricopa County Air Quality Department,
1001 N. Central Ave., Phoenix, AZ, 85004. This publication is available for purchase at the
(California) Air Resources Board, PO Box 2815, 2020 L Street, Sacramento, CA, 95812-2815;
(916) 323-0255 or (916) 322-2886.
504 505 TEST METHODS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE: The EPA test methods as they exist in the
Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) (July 1, 1998 Date of rule adoption), as listed below, are adopted by
reference. The CARB test methods as they exist in Stationary Source Test Methods, Volume 2, on April 8,
1999, as listed in subsection 504.4 are adopted by reference. The other test methods listed here are also
adopted by reference, each having paired with it a specific date that identifies the particular
version/revision of the method that is adopted by reference. These adoptions by reference include no future
editions or amendments. Copies of test methods referenced in this Section 504 are available at the
Maricopa County Air Quality Department, 1001 N. Central Ave., Phoenix, AZ, 85004. The following test
methods are approved for use for the purpose of determining compliance with this rule. The test methods
are adopted by reference in Appendix G of the Maricopa County Air Pollution Control Regulations.
Alternative test methods as approved by the Administrator or other EPA-approved test methods may be
used upon prior written approval from the Control Officer. When more than one test method is permitted
for the same determination, an exceedance under any method will constitute a violation. Copies of test
methods referenced in this section are available at the Maricopa County Air Quality Department, 1001 N.
Central Avenue, Suite 125, Phoenix, AZ 85004-1942.
504.1 505.1 EPA Test Methods:
a. EPA Methods 2a (“Direct Measurement of Gas Volume Through Pipes and Small Ducts”),
and 2b (“Determination of Exhaust-Gas Volume Flow-Rate from Gasoline Vapor
Incinerators“). Both of the foregoing methods are in 40 CFR 60, Appendix A.
b. EPA Method 21 - Determination of Volatile Organic Compound Leaks.
c. EPA Method 21-Determination of Volatile Organic Compound Leaks, Alternative Screening
Procedure 8.3.3
b. d. EPA Method 25 (“Determination of Total Gaseous Nonmethane Organic Emissions as
Carbon”) and its submethods (40 CFR 60, Appendix A).
e. EPA Method 27 (“Determination of Vapor Tightness of Gasoline Delivery Tank Using
Pressure-Vacuum Test”) in 40 CFR 60, Appendix A.

f. Optical Gas Imaging: Alternative Work Practice for Monitoring Equipment Leaks, 40 CFR
60.18(g). An owner or operator may use an optical gas imaging instrument instead of a 40
CFR part 60, Appendix A-7, Method 21to monitor for equipment volatile organic compound
leaks.
504.2 505.2 Gasoline Vapor Pressure: ASTM Standards:
a. American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) Method D323-94 (1994) ASTM D323-
15a “Standard Test Method for Vapor Pressure of Petroleum Products (Reid Method).
b. American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) Method D4953-93 (1993) ASTM
D4953-15 “Standard Test Method for Vapor Pressure of Gasoline and Gasoline-Oxygenate
Blends (Dry Method)
504.3 Leak Detection Test Method:
a. Calibration: Within four hours prior to monitoring, the CGD or OVA shall be suitably
calibrated in a manner and with the gas specified by the manufacturer for 20 percent LEL
response, or calibrated with methane for a 10,000 ppm response.
b. Probe Distance: The probe inlet shall be one inch (2.5 cm) or less from the potential leak
source when searching for leaks. The probe inlet shall be one inch (2.5 cm) from the leak
source when the highest detector reading is being determined for a discovered leak. When the
probe is obstructed from moving within one inch (2.5 cm) of an actual or potential leak
source, the closest practicable probe distance greater than 1 inch shall be used.
c. Probe Movement: The probe shall be moved slowly, not faster than 1.6 inches per second (4
centimeters per second). If there is any meter deflection at a potential or actual leak source,
the probe shall be positioned to locate the point of highest meter response.
d. Probe Position: The probe inlet shall be positioned in the path of the vapor flow from a leak,
such that the central axis of the probe-tube inlet shall be positioned coaxially with the path of
the most concentrated vapors.
e. Data Recording: The highest detector reading and location for each incidence of detected
leakage shall be recorded, along with the date and time. If no gasoline vapor is detected, that
fact shall be entered into the record.
504.4 505.3 CARB Certification and Test Procedures for Gasoline Vapor Recovery Systems:
a. CARB Test Method CP-201, “Certification Procedure for Vapor Recovery Systems of
Dispensing Facilities”.
b. CARB Test Procedure TP-201.1 - “Determination of Efficiency of Phase I Vapor Recovery
Systems of Dispensing Facilities without Assist Processors”.
c. CARB Test Procedure TP-201.1A - “Determination of Efficiency of Phase I Vapor Recovery
Systems of Dispensing Facilities with Assist Processors”.
a. California Environmental Protection Agency, Air Resources Board Vapor Recovery Test
Procedure TP-201.1B, Static Torque of Rotatable Phase 1 Adaptors, October 8, 2003 edition,
California Air Resources Board, P.O. Box 2815, 2020 L. Street, Sacramento, California
95812-2815.
b. California Air Resources Board Vapor Recovery Test Procedure TP-201.1,—Volumetric
Efficiency for Phase I Vapor Recovery Systems, adopted April 12, 1996, and amended
February 1, 2001, and October 8, 2003.
c. California Air Resources Board Vapor Recovery Test Procedure TP-201.1A - “Determination
of Efficiency of Phase I Vapor Recovery Systems of Dispensing Facilities with Assist
Processors”.

d. California Environmental Protection Agency, Air Resources Board Vapor Recovery Test
Procedure TP-201.1E, Leak Rate and Cracking Pressure of Pressure/Vacuum Vent Valves,
October 8, 2003 edition.
e. California Environmental Protection Agency, Air Resources Board Vapor Recovery Test
Procedure TP-201.1C, Leak Rate of Drop Tube/Drain Valve Assembly, October 8, 2003,
edition.
f. California Environmental Protection Agency, Air Resources Board Vapor Recovery Test
Procedure TP-201.1D, Leak Rate of Drop Tube Overfill Protection Devices and Spill
Container Drain Valves, October 8, 2003 edition.
g. California Air Resources Board Vapor Recovery Test Procedure TP-201.3,—Determination
of 2-Inch WC Static Pressure Performance of Vapor Recovery Systems of Dispensing
Facilities, adopted April 12, 1996, and amended March 17, 1999.
h. Bay Area Air Quality Management District Source Test Procedure ST-30—Static Pressure
Integrity Test—Underground Storage Tanks, adopted November 30, 1983, and amended
December 21, 1994.
505.4 Additional Test Methods:
a. American Petroleum Institute Standard API STD 650 Welded Tanks for Oil Storage, Twelfth
Edition, Includes Errata 1 (2013), Errata 2 (2014), and Addendum 1 (2014).
b. San Diego County Air Pollution Control District Test Procedure TP-96-1, March 1996, Third
Revision.

Return to list of attachments
MARICOPA COUNTY BOARD OF HEALTH MEETING MINUTES
Monday, April 25, 2016
301 W. Jefferson Street, 10th Floor
Phoenix, Arizona 85003
Board of Supervisors Conference Room
President Kip Steill called the meeting to order at 3:09 p.m.
ROLL CALL:
Members Present: Members Excused:
Don Cassano Scott Somers
Nedra Halley Francisca Montoya
Andrew Kunasek
Debra Baldauff
Kip Steill
Don Hughes
Robert MacMillan
Michael Mills, M.D. (via phone)
Ex-Officio: Bob England, M.D.
CALL TO THE PUBLIC:
Mr. Kip Steill announced it was time for a call to the public and requested public comment forms
for those who wanted to speak or who wanted to address any action items.
Supervisor Kunasek introduced the newest Board of Health member, Mr. MacMillan.
DISCUSSION/ACTION ITEMS
1. Election of Board of Health Vice President:
Mr. Don Hughes was nominated as Vice President of the Board of Health. A motion was made by
Mr. Don Cassano and seconded by Ms. Nedra Halley and all were in favor. The motion passed
unanimously.
2. Approval of Minutes: President Steill asked for a motion to approve the minutes from the BOH
Meeting held on January 25, 2016. Motion was made by Ms. Nedra Halley to approve the BOH
minutes as presented. Motion was seconded by Mr. Don Cassano and the motion passed
unanimously.
3. Approval of Public Health FY 17 OMB Budget Recommendation Mr. Scot Pitcairn
The Board of Health Finance Committee recommended that the Board of Health approve Public
Health’s FY 17 OMB Budget Recommendation. Mr. Pitcairn was available to answer any questions
that the Board of Health had. Motion was made by Mr. Don Hughes to approve Public Health’s FY
17 OMB budget recommendation. Motion was seconded by Mr. Don Cassano and the motion
passed unanimously.
4. Approval of Environmental Services FY 17 OMB Budget Recommendation Ms. Diane Cabanillas
The Board of Health Finance Committee recommended that the Board of Health approve
Environmental Services’ FY 17 OMB Budget Recommendation. Ms. Cabanillas was available to
answer any questions that the Board of Health had. Motion was made by Mr. Don Hughes to
1

approve Environmental Services FY 17 OMB budget recommendation. Motion was seconded by Mr.
Halley and the motion passed unanimously.
5. Approval of the initiation of regulatory change for the ozone-related Mr. Philip A. McNeely
rulemakings
The rules being revised regarding ozone are the following:
Rule 241: Minor New Source Review
Rule 322: Power Plant Operations
Rule 323: Fuel Burning Equipment from Industrial/Commercial/Institutional Sources
Rule 324: Stationary Internal Combustion (IC) Engines
Rule 336: Surface Coating Operations
Rule 342: Coating Wood Furniture and Fixtures
Rule 350: Storage of Organic Liquids at Bulk Plants and Terminals
Rule 351: Loading of Organic Liquids
Rule 352: Gasoline Delivery Vessel Testing and Use
Rule 353: Gasoline In Stationary Dispensing Tanks
These rules are being closed for public comment and will be published May 13th. If there is no
further comment, the rules will go to the Board of Supervisors for a hearing. These rules are in
regards to non-attainment for the ozone standards. These rules are due to the EPA January 1, 2017
and have gone through the EROP/stakeholder meeting process. Every facility that has a permit will
receive information when rule changes are occurring via email. For more information on the
regulatory process: http://www.maricopa.gov/regulations/default.aspx
Motion was made by Mr. Don Cassano to approve the initiation of regulatory change for the
ozone-related rulemakings. Motion was seconded by Ms. Nedra Halley and the motion passed
unanimously.
6. Fee Waiver Applications Mr. Ken Conklin
Mr. Ken Conklin presented thirty-two (32) fee waivers for review and consideration of approval. A
summary sheet document was provided.
Motion to approve the 32 Fee Waiver applications was made by Ms. Nedra Halley, seconded by
Mr. Don Cassano and all were in favor. Motion passed unanimously.
Discussion Items:
1. Public Health Report: Dr. Bob England
i. Human Resources
ii. Communication
iii. Infrastructure
iv. Strategic Planning
v. Programs
vi. Disease Update
vii. Future Topics
Dr. Bob provided the Board of Health with the updated Public Health org chart. The re-org has
aligned MCDPH into programmatic divisions. Previously, MCDPH was organized by funding stream.
Dr. Bob briefed the board on funding cuts that the department is receiving, including a $300,000
cut to WIC and $230,000 cut to the Office of Preparedness and Response (CDC is pulling some
money back for the Zika response). WIC is struggling to meet a target number of clients but each
time the program doesn’t meet the target, the number of target clients and funding is decreased.
The reason for difficulties with reaching the target number of client is that client encounter has
2

become increasingly more complex. The Office of Vital Records is moving their St. Mary’s Food
Bank location to a location near the 1-17 and Dunlap. MCDPH is no longer tracking returning
travelers from ebola stricken countries. Arizona has experienced the highest level of severity in the
country for flu for hospitalization and death rates. CDC is gathering data but there may not be
enough lab evidence to determine a cause. Zika virus is another of the flaviviruses that is associated
with significant neurological defects in infants whose mothers were infected with the virus in the
first two trimesters of pregnancy. The primary vector is Aedes Aegypti mosquitos. In Maricopa
County, there is no endemic spread of zika; only one travel associated case. The strategy when
there is a travel associated case is to have the individual stay inside, wear repellant, and when
necessary, have Environmental Services do traps and remediation depending on consent. There is
concern regarding the process and timeline it would take to enter private property if necessary to
spray for this type of mosquito. The Surgeon General will be visiting Arizona in May to do a tour on
opioid use. The NACCHO Annual meeting will be July 19 – 21 in Phoenix.
ANNOUNCEMENTS AND CURRENT EVENTS
 Next meeting is July 25, 2016
ADJOURNMENT: There being no further business, motion to adjourn the meeting was made by Mr.
Don Cassano, seconded by Ms. Halley and motion was passed unanimously. The meeting was
adjourned at 4:27 p.m.
3

Copies of all written and electronic Stakeholder input
Return to list of attachments
Michelle Mada - AQDX
From: Hether Krause - AQDX
Sent: Monday, June 13, 2016 8:39 AM
To: Johanna Kuspert - AQDX
Subject: FW: Regulatory Outreach
From: Jennifer Pokorski - FCDX
Sent: Monday, June 13, 2016 8:34 AM
To: Hether Krause - AQDX
Cc: Lynne Hilliard - MCDOTX
Subject: FW: Regulatory Outreach
From: Regulatory [mailto:regulations@mail.maricopa.gov]
Sent: Saturday, June 11, 2016 9:27 AM
To: Hether Krause - ENVX; Valerie Beckett - PLANDEVX; Jennifer Pokorski - FCDX
Subject: FW: Regulatory Outreach
-------------------------------------------
From: anne.carlton@aps.com[SMTP:ANNE.CARLTON@APS.COM]
Sent: Saturday, June 11, 2016 9:27:26 AM
To: Regulatory
Subject: Regulatory Outreach
Auto forwarded by a Rule
Citizen Comments
Issue: AQ-2015-008 Rule 353 Storage and Loading of Gasoline at Gasoline Dispensing Facilities
Citizen's Name: Anne Carlton
Organization: APS
City: Phoenix
Zip: 85004
Phone Number:
Phone Type:
Email: anne.carlton@aps.com
Does citizen want to be contacted: no
Comment is regarding: other
Comments:
It is unclear whether monitoring requirements found in section 501 are required to be completed by the owner/operator
and if so, how frequently.
Time of Request: 6/11/2016 9:27:26 AM
1

Michelle Mada - AQDX
From: Hether Krause - AQDX
Sent: Monday, June 13, 2016 8:46 AM
To: Johanna Kuspert - AQDX
Subject: FW: EPA comment on Maricopa Rule 353
From: Steckel, Andrew [mailto:Steckel.Andrew@epa.gov]
Sent: Friday, June 10, 2016 3:22 PM
To: Hether Krause - AQDX; Marina Mejia (Mejia.Marina@azdeq.gov)
Cc: Shears, James; McKaughan, Colleen; Drake, Kerry
Subject: EPA comment on Maricopa Rule 353
United States Environmental Protection Agency
Region IX
75 Hawthorne Street
San Francisco, CA 94105-3901
June 10, 2016
Transmittal of EPA Rule Review Comments
To: Hether Krause, Maricopa County Environmental Services Department
hkrause@mail.maricopa.gov
Marina Mejia, Arizona Department Of Environmental Quality
mejia.marina@azdeq.gov
From: Andrew Steckel, Rulemaking Office Chief
steckel.andrew@epa.gov
Re: Maricopa Rule 353, Storage and Loading of Gasoline at Gasoline Dispensing
Facilities, May 13, 2016
We are providing comments based on our preliminary review of the draft rule identified above. Please direct any
questions about our comments to me at (415) 947-4115 or to James Shears at (213) 244-1810.
Section 103.4 exempts all agricultural stationary gasoline dispensing tanks from vapor control requirements except for
general housekeeping. It is not clear why tanks in agricultural operations should be subject to different requirements from
similar tanks in other industries. We also understand from conversations with MCESD staff that there may not be any
gasoline dispensing tanks at agricultural operations in Maricopa County. Please remove this exemption, replace it with a
more tailored and reasonable exemption (e.g., SJVUAPCD Rule 4621 Section 4.1 and Placer County APCD Rule 213,
Section 102.1.1 include a general 550 gallon tank exemption), or demonstrate why it is appropriate.
1

Michelle Mada - AQDX
From: Cheri Dale - AQDX
Sent: Friday, June 24, 2016 4:31 PM
To: Johanna Kuspert - AQDX; Hether Krause - AQDX
Subject: FW: Maricopa County (AZ) AQ-2015-008 Rule 353 (Storage and Loading of Gasoline at
Gasoline Dispensing Facilities Comment Response
FYI. The comment and response will be included in the DRAFT NFRM.
Cheri
From: Cheri Dale - AQDX
Sent: Friday, June 24, 2016 4:29 PM
To: anne.carlton@aps.com
Subject: Maricopa County (AZ) AQ-2015-008 Rule 353 (Storage and Loading of Gasoline at Gasoline Dispensing Facilities
Comment Response
Anne,
Thank you for your comments concerning AQ-2015-008 Rule 353 (Storage and Loading of Gasoline at Gasoline
Dispensing Facilities).
Comments:
It is unclear whether monitoring requirements found in Section 501 are required to be completed by the owner/operator
and if so, how frequently.
Department Response:
Short answers to your comments:
1. Who determines vapor tight status? An owner or operator or Control Officer can determine the vapor tight status
of a component.
2. How frequently should the vapor tight status be determined? As needed, if a vapor leak is identified or if the
Control Officer is confirming compliance.
Discussion:
Current Rule 353, Section 503.3 (Vapor Leaks) states:
a. If a determination of leak-tight status is to be made on Stage 1 or spill containment equipment at a gasoline
dispensing facility or on a delivery vessel at the station, the method in subsection 504.3 shall be used. (Section
504.3 describes the procedure for using a combustible gas detector or an organic vapor analyzer)
Section 303.1 and Section 303.2 of PROPOSED Rule 353 both include provisions for the storage tanks to be maintained
to prevent vapors from escaping into the atmosphere. Section 401 of PROPOSED Rule 353 addresses the inspections and
frequency of such inspections. Section 503 of PROPOSED Rule 353 addresses the recordkeeping requirements for the
inspection records.
1

The purpose of Section 501 of PROPOSED Rule 353 was to provide easy methods for owners, operators and the Control
Officer to quickly identify if a component is leaking vapors into the atmosphere. A component may be leaking vapor into
the atmosphere but still be considered “vapor-tight” per the definition in Section 200 of the rule. For a component to be
vapor tight, by definition, the component cannot “leak” 10,000 ppmv or more than 1/5 the lower explosive level of vapor.
Basically, a component may have a vapor leak and still be considered vapor tight. Providing additional methods for the
identification of any type of vapor leak (the optical gas imaging and the soapy solution spray) allows for the quick
identification and location of a vapor leak without the expense and time it takes to calibrate and check for leaks using a
combustible gas detector (CGD) or organic vapor analyzer (OVA). If the optical gas imaging or soapy water methods do
not identify any potential “vapor leaks” there is no need to check for leaks using an CGD or OVA, but the option is still is
available. To determine the “vapor tight” status of a component a CGD, OVA, or a calibrated optical gas imaging device
operated by a certified operator can be used to identify how much vapor is escaping, answering the question if the
component is vapor tight.
The PROPOSED title of Section 501 “Monitoring for Leaks” is somewhat misleading and implies that one is required to
check for leaks using at least one of the three vapor leak detection procedures listed in the rule, thus your question. To
clarify the intention Section 501 of PROPOSED Rule 353 to apply to the determination of a vapor tight status, the
department is revising the PROPOSED Rule 353, Section 501 language to read as follows:
SECTION 500 – MONITORING AND RECORDS:
501 DETERMINING VAPOR-TIGHT STATUS: If a determination of vapor-tight status is to be
made on Stage 1 or spill containment equipment at a gasoline dispensing facility or on a gasoline cargo
tank, an owner or operator or Control Officer shall use one or more of the methods listed in Section 501
of this rule.
Changing the wording from “Monitoring for Leaks” to “Determining Vapor-Tight Status” clarifies the intent of the
section. The department believes the phrase “If a determination of vapor-tight status is to be made…” sets the parameters
as to when a vapor-tight status is to be determined. Through the required periodic inspections and recordkeeping
requirements specified in Sections 401 and 503 of PROPOSED Rule 353, the owner or operator will (hopefully) be able
to identify any leaks, both liquid and vapor, in a timely manner to prevent gasoline vapors from escaping. If there is a
question as to how much a component is leaking, at that time a determination of the vapor-tight status should be made. If
the component is leaking vapors that are above the limits identified in the definition of “Vapor Tight” then the component
is not vapor tight. If a component is leaking vapors but is under the limits specified in the definition, then the component
does have a vapor leak but is considered vapor tight.
If you have additional questions or comments, please contact me.
Thank you for participating in the rulemaking process.
Cheri
Cheri Dale
Senior Planner
Desk 602.506.3476
2

Return to list of attachments